Social Psychology Lecture 10

Attitude Change

Cognitive Dissonance Theory

Jane ClarbourRoom PS/B007 email: jc129

Objectives

• Define ‘cognitive dissonance’• Report an experiment on how cognitive dissonance

can occur in decision making• Explain the ‘forced compliance’ paradigm• Account for the role of arousal in cognitive

dissonance theory• State revisions to cognitive dissonance theory• Demonstrate an understanding of how cognitive

dissonance can be reduced.

Cognitive Dissonance Theory

• Festinger (1957)– Cognitive dissonance occurs when there is

inconsistency between 2 cognitions• Cognitions: knowledge, opinions, beliefs

(relating to self, behaviour, or environment)• Dissonance: A state of psychological tension

which motivates people to do something to get rid of it to resume cognitive consistency

Example of cognitive dissonance

• Smoker– Knowledge that wants a cigarette– Knowledge that smoking causes cancer

Desire KnowledgeWants to stop smoking Smoking is bad for health

Creates state of tension

Motivated to get rid of discomfort!

Festinger’s main ways to reduce dissonance:

• Change behaviour • Change cognitions (focus of most research)

• Add new information

Cognitive dissonance in decision making

• Dissonance occurs due to continued attraction towards rejected alternative

– Reduction of dissonance by:1. Viewing chosen alternative A more positively

2. Viewing rejected alternative B more negatively

3. Attitude changed as a result of making the decision

Decision making study

• Ss in the experimental choice condition rated their chosen article (A) as more attractive than in their first rating.

• Rejected article (B) rates as less attractive

No change in control

Time 1 Time 2

Choice A6/B6 A7/B5

No choice A6 A6

Decision making experiment:

Early conclusions (Brehm, 1956)

• Supports the predictions of cognitive dissonance theory– Attitude change is a consequence of

having to make the decision

Forced compliance paradigm

• Forced compliance may involve either/both of two elements:

1. counter-motivational • Performing behaviours don’t want to

2. counter-attitudinal • Stating like things when don’t really like them

Justification for attitude change

• Cognitive dissonance theory – small rewards are most likely to affect

attitude change by making the attitude to the product more favourable.

– The smaller the reward, the greater the dissonance

Boring tasks experiments Festinger & Carlsmith (1959)

• Forced compliance paradigm – Wooden peg task

– Spools of thread task• Ss have to tell next Ss that task was really

interesting (3 conditions)C1: paid $1

C2: paid $20

C3: Control (not paid at all)

Results Festinger & Carlsmith (1959)

$1 $20 control

Level of interest in task

Wooden pegs

Threads

The role of arousal in CDT (Cooper et al, 1978)

• Arousal is hypothesised to motivate attitude change– Ss were asked to write an essay justifying the

pardon of ex-president Nixon– Experimental Ss given pills and placed into

various conditions to manipulate arousal • Tranquillizer (‘downer’)• Amphetamine (‘upper’)• Placebo (milk power)

Design of arousal and forced compliance experiment

• 2 x 3 factorial design– Choice: 2 levels

• (High choice/low choice)– High choice: up to Ss if want to take part– Low choice: just given paper to write on

– Arousal: 3 levels• Phenobarbital (tranquilliser condition)• Amphetamine (arousal condition)• Milk power (placebo condition)

Results• Placebo

– Sig. more attitude change in the direction of the essay for high choice than low choice

• Tranquilliser condition– No difference when compared to control group

• Amphetamine– Attitude change increased in both high and low

choice conditions• Shows arousal influences attitude change over and

above cognitive appraisal (effect of choice)

Findings so far…• Cognitive dissonance caused by inconsistency in

beliefs • Attitude change as consequence of dissonance

resolution • Attitude change must be own choice

– (preference for goods decision making experiment: Brehm, 1956) .

• The smaller the reward, the greater the dissonance – (interest in boring task experiment: Festinger & Carlsmith,

1959)

• Arousal is necessary for attitude change (Cooper et al, 1978)

                                                                                  

http://chiron.valdosta.edu/mawhatley/767/cogdiss.htm

Alternative interpretations of findings in forced compliance studies…

• $20 fee too large (bribe) • Preservation of self-concept (not inconsistency

of beliefs) (Aronson, 1968)

• Attitude change reaffirms values (Steele & Liu, 1981)

– But only necessary if feel responsible for choice/behaviour

Commitment and volition (Brehm & Cohen, 1962)

• Inconsistency between beliefs is insufficient to create cognitive dissonance– The subject must feel able to choose whether to perform the

counter-attitudinal behaviour

• Commitment and volition are necessary for cognitive dissonance– Feeling of responsibility– Control– Choice

Revisions to cognitive dissonance theory

• New Look theory (Cooper & Fazio, 1984)

– Dissonance more to do with unwanted consequence, than inconsistent belief

– Suggests greater emphasis on personal responsibility

– Supports claims that arousal is motivational in attitude change in forced compliance tasks

Revisions to cognitive dissonance theory

• Radical dissonance theory (Beauvois & Joules, 1996)

– greater focus on personal commitment – Stresses the importance of rationalisation

of counter-attitudinal behaviour• Cognitive rationalisation • Act rationalisation

In conclusion

• Research suggests dissonance may be reduced two main ways:

1. Cognitive– Getting rid of incongruence in beliefs– Attribute responsibility to external source

2. Behavioural– Change behaviour– Rationalization of changed behaviour

– Cognitive rationalization

– Act rationalization

Objective 1• Define ‘cognitive dissonance’

– Festinger’s (1957) cognitive dissonance theory definition :

• A state of psychological tension arising from inconsistency between two cognitions which motivates (drives) attitude change

– Radical dissonance theory’s definition:• A process of cognitive or behavioural

rationalization to reduce tension created by counter-attitudinal behaviour

Objective 2

• Report an experiment on how cognitive dissonance can occur in decision making– Consumer research study showed that Ss

reduced their ratings of objects they had previously highly rated when told they could only keep one of them (Brehm, 1956)

Objective 3

• Define ‘forced compliance’– When people act in a way which is

problematic to them because it goes against their own beliefs• Note: Beauvois & Joule (1996) suggest

that this paradigm works because it involves obedience to an authority figure

Objective 4

• Account for the role of arousal in cognitive dissonance theory– Arousal is thought to motivate attitude

change• Experimental examples include Cooper et al,

(1978) – Tutorial 3• Interpretation that necessary for change

(Cooper & Fazio, 1984) • Discussion of lower rates of attitudinal change

with external attribution for compliance

Objective 5

• State revisions to cognitive dissonance theory– Radical dissonance theory (Beavois & Jules,

1996):• Emphasis on commitment • Stresses the importance of rationalisation of counter-

attitudinal behaviour

– ‘New look’ approach (Cooper & Fazio, 1984)• Emphasis on personal responsibility

Objective 6

• Demonstrate an understanding of how cognitive dissonance can be reduced.– Attribute responsibility to external source– Reduce the importance of dissonant cognitions– Add new cognitions that are similar to dissonant

cognitions…

Key reading

• Beauvois & Joules (1996) Radical dissonance theory

• Cooper & Fazio (1984) New look approach

• Franzoi (2000) pp. 170 - 181