THEORY OF COGNITIVE DISSONANCE (1957) BASIC HYPOTHESIS The existence of dissonance, being psychologically uncomfortable, will motivate the person to try and reduce the dissonance and achieve consonance Attitude Behavior inconsistent with the attitude Creation of dissonance Leon Festinger

Earthquake Research by Singh in India Epicenter In unaffected areas far away from the epicenter, people exhibited high levels of anxiety and spread rumors of impending further disaster. Why?

Why was the theory of cognitive dissonance (“insufficient justification) such a big deal?

Traditional Persuasion Techniques A)Greater rewards lead to more responses B) Greater punishment leads to less responses C)Use of "credible" sources (experts, authority figures) D) Use of conformity paradigms (e.g., Asch, Sherif) Some Weaknesses of Traditional Persuasion Approaches Effects not very strong Short-term effects Limited to less important issues

Attitude: “I’m not going to smoke cigarettes anymore” Behavior: Smoke cigarettes Attitude-Behavior Inconsistency 1 ) Change behavior (e.g., Throw pack away) 2)Change cognitions (e.g., “Smoking isn’t all that bad”; “I don’t really smoke that much”) 3) Add supporting cognitions (e.g., “ Smoking relaxes me” “it helps me think better” Some Options

COGNITIVE DISSONANCE FESTINGER & CARLSMITH (1$ - $20 Study) Perform boring task Asked to tell participant that the task was interesting (to lie) $1 $20 Rate task Which group rated the task as more interesting after lying, those paid $1 or $20? Key is lack of sufficient external justification for one’s behavior BoringInteresting $1 | $20 |

“TOY” STUDY Children rate desirability of toys Told not to play with the most desirable toy MILD THREATSEVERE THREAT Children did not play with the desired toy Children rate the desirability of the toys a 2 nd time after not playing with the desired Which group viewed the desirable toy most attractive? Attractiveness Low High Attractiveness Low High

ATTITUDES REGARDING MARIJUANA LEGALIZATION Original belief = “No” Asked to give speech opposite of their attitude (for legalization) Speech watched by research team Told speech taped and would be shown to high school students Attitudes regarding marijuana legalization More positive views of legalization

Choice is involved Individuals are responsible for any consequences of their behavior (and if the consequences could be anticipated) Negative consequences are believed to be likely to occur One’s self-concept is involved More Cognitive Dissonance Occurs When:

Self-Perception Theory (Bem) Internal States (e.g., “So-called “private” stimuli, physiological) “Gross” evaluation (e.g., “I feel happy”; “I feel sad”) Use of external social cues for precise discriminations (e.g., other people’s behavior or one’s own actions, statements, thoughts) Attitudes formed

Components of Attitudes  Affective (Emotional)  Behavioral  Cognitive (Thinking)

(Pretest) Various scales to assess attitudes on environmental issues e.g., favorability, attitudes (good-bad, wise-foolish); extent consider oneself an environmentalist; cognitions regarding environmentalism WEAKSTRONG Behavioral salience survey/manipulation -- what people actually did about environmental issues (“I occasionally pick up other people’s garbage and take it to the trash can,” I occasionally carpool rather than drive separately,” “I frequently litter.” Post-test (attitude scales on environmental issues) Those with weak initial environmental attitudes had their attitudes affected by their responses to the behavioral questionnaire SELF-PERCEPTION STUDY Low affective-cognitive consistency role

What are the “big picture” implications of this research? One’s overt behavior One’s thoughts, self statements One’s verbal statements Strive for consistency with overall attitude What’s one’s attitude regarding a specific issue? Form general attitude (e.g., I’m politically conservative or liberal) “Weak” attitude