1. Attitude Change: Dissonance Versus Self-Perception MAR 3503 February 2, 2012

2. Cognitive dissonance theory Festinger (1957) said… – 1. Dissonance is an aversive motivational state, giving rise to pressures to reduce itself – 2. It is aroused when 2 (or more) cognitions are inconsistent. It is especially strong when one cognition is a belief, and the other concerns one’s own behavior – 3. It is reduced, most importantly, by changing one or more cognitions so as to bring them into line; typically attitudes change to be consistent with behavior

3. Three paradigms 1. Post-decisional dissonance reduction 2. Effort justification 3. Induced compliance

4. Post-decision dissonance reduction Chosen itemUnchosen itemNet change Low dissonance+0.110.00+0.11 High dissonance+0.38-0.41+0.79 Control (gift)0.00 Brehm, 1956 Changes from 1 st to 2 nd rating Note: A positive sign indicates an increase in attractiveness. Net change indicates the spreading apart of the alternatives after a decision. Low dissonance is a decision between items of very different value. High dissonance is a decision between items of similar value.

5. Dissonance at the race track Know & Inkster, 1968 14 67 52 3 SlightFair Good Great Chance to win BeforeAfter

6. Dissonance at the polls Before votingAfter voting Chances of election4.124.96 Beauty of foliage5.125.09 Regan & Kilduff, 1988

7. Dissonance and amnesia Lieberman et al., 2001

8. Dissonance in monkeys Capuchin monkeys were tested to see whether they showed equal preferences between red, green, and blue M&Ms Choice #1: Choice #2: Egan, Santos, & Bloom, 2007

9. Dissonance in monkeys Egan, Santos, & Bloom, 2007

10. Effort Justification: Severity of initiation & liking Discussion ratingsParticipant ratings Control group8090 Mild initiation8289 Severe initiation98 Aronson & Mills, 1959

11. Severity of initiation & liking Mild shockSevere shock Initiation participants, told they passed 11.531.1 Initiation participants, not told they passed 26.141.0 Non-initiation participants19.813.2 Gerard & Mathewson, 1966

12. Low introductory prices A chain of stores in the South randomly assigned certain new items to have a low introductory price or their regular price After a week and a half, all products were at their regular price. The higher priced items quickly caught up to the low priced items’ sales, and then surpassed them The low price people think it’s now not worth it, while the high priced people like it even more

13. Induced Compliance: Festinger & Carlsmith, 1959 Students who were paid to lie to a confederate and say an objectively boring task was interesting claimed that the task was more enjoyable if they were paid just $1 than if they were paid $20 to tell the lie Control condiiton$1 condition$20 condition Task ratings-0.45+1.35-0.05

14. Threat and compliance Children were brought into the lab and presented with a set of toys, with one really attractive toy The experimenter told them to play with any toy except the best one, and left them alone – The instruction was either mild (“I’ll be disappointed…”) or severe (“I’ll be very angry and have to do something about it”). All obeyed. 6 weeks later, a different exp’r came to school and let them play with any toy, including the best one Freedman, 1965

15. Threat and compliance High threatLow threat # that played with toy146 # that didn’t play with toy715 Freedman, 1965

16. Threat and compliance Reported score Mild threat34.1 Control36.2 Severe threat38.2

17. But…Do we know our attitudes? There are times when our attitudes are unclear or unknown – Novel issues or events – Jukebox theory of emotion Can we feel dissonance if we don’t know what our conflicting attitude even is?

18. Bem’s Self-Perception Theory Self-perception works like social perception. Namely, people come to understand themselves and their attitudes the same way that they come to understand others—by observing behavior – To the extent that internal cues are weak, ambiguous, or uninterpretable, we are in the shoes of an observer – These evaluations are not conscious—they are quick inferences – We answer the question of our attitude externally, by observing our behavior Attitude “change” is not real change. It is a dispassionate inference process

19. Two-factor theory of emotion Different emotions are distinguished not by their physiological reactions, but instead by the cognitive interpretation for the reactions – Physiological arousal is the same across emotions, but the strength of the arousal determines emotional intensity – The content of the emotion is determined by the causal attribution for the emotion Physiology + Cognition = Emotion Schacter & Singer, 1962

20. Misattribution of arousal Two paradigms – 1. Misattributing irrelevant arousal to an emotional stimulus, thus intensifying one’s emotional reaction – 2. Misattributing arousal due to an emotional stimulus to an irrelevant source, thus diminishing one’s emotional reaction

21. Love on a bridge Males were approached by an attractive female experimenter after having crossed either a scary bridge or a non-scary control bridge They were asked to complete the TAT, then were given her phone number “in case they have any later questions” about the study Dutton & Aron, 1974

22. Love on a bridge Sexual imagery% calling Control bridge Scary bridge Data: Amount of sexual imagery in their TAT responses, as coded by independent judges, and the percentage of of males who called her to ask her out Dutton & Aron, 1974

23. Heat produces arousal Mean # of players hit by pitches (HBP) in games played at different temperatures

24. Misattributing anxiety Participants were told they were being bombarded with “subliminal noise” – Some told this noise would arouse them – Some told this noise would relax them – Some told this noise would have no effect DM: number of speech dysfluencies when reading a speech into a camera Olson, 1988

25. Misattributing anxiety ConditionDysfluencies Arousing noise14.2 No-effect noise19.4 Relaxing noise19.8 Olson, 1988

26. Both cognitive dissonance and self-perception result in a match between attitude and behavior – Dissonance results in attitude change – Self-perception results in attitude creation How do they both exist? DO they both exist? Attitude change?

27. Reconsider: Dissonance in monkeys Capuchin monkeys were tested to see whether they showed equal preferences between red, green, and blue M&Ms Choice #1: Choice #2: Egan, Santos, & Bloom, 2007

28. Self-perception uniquely explains… Foot-in-the-door 1. People look at the fact that they agreed to comply to a small request (with no strong incentive to do so), then… 2. They infer that they are the kind of person who cares about that particular cause (or the kind of person who agrees to pro-social requests, in general), and… 3. They are more likely to agree to larger requests

29. Self-perception uniquely explains… The overjustification effect Undermining intrinsic motivation by using overly sufficient rewards Self-perception explanation: just as an outside observer would, we assume we have less interest in activities performed as a means to some outside end (or because of some outside constraints), rather than as an end in themselves

30. Dissonance theory uniquely explains… Misattribution of dissonance motivation Zanna & Cooper, 1974 Alleged drug effect Attitude toward target issue

31. Dissonance theory uniquely explains… Arousal and attitude change Cooper et al., 1978 Attitude toward target issue Actual drug taken

32. Toward a resolution Dissonance processes occur when clearly-held attitudes are strongly discrepant with behavior Self-perception processes occur when attitudes are unclear or weak, or when behavior is not very discrepant from the attitude. Self-perception processes are particularly likely to be important in the realm of attitude formation

33. Summary At times, a person’s behavior and attitudes may conflict – Attitudes change to align with the person’s behavior Other times, a person acts without an underlying attitude – They will assume their attitude matches their behavior The circumstances under which these attitude change processes occur are systematic and predictable Next time: How can people be persuaded?