Chapter 6 - Cognitive Dissonance and the need to protect our self-esteem

Question 1

Who developed the theory of cognitive dissonance and describe what it is.

Answer 1

Festinger 1957

• A powerful determinant of behaviour is our need to preserve a stable, positive self-image.
• The discomfort people feel when 2 cognitions conflict, or when our behaviour conflicts with our attitudes. Aronson (1969) showed dissonance is most painful, and we are most motivated to reduce it, when one of the dissonant cognitions challenge our self-esteem. Thus - the discomfort people feel when they behave in ways that threaten their self-esteem.
• actions or beliefs that challenge our very sense of self-worth

Question 2

3 ways to reduce dissonance?

Answer 2

• Change behaviour to bring it in line with the dissonant cognition
• Attempt to justify our behaviour by changing one of the dissonant cognitions
• Attempt to justify our behaviour by adding new cognitions
  We can also
  4. Minimize the importance of the conflict
  5. Reduce perceived choice

Question 3

Post-decision Dissonance

Answer 3

Dissonance aroused after making a decision, typically reduced by enhancing the the attractiveness of the chosen alternative and devaluaing the rejected alternatives.
- Ie. Strengthen the good things about the decision you made and enhancing the bad things about the decision you didn’t take.

Question 4

Describe Brehm (1956) study - the appliance experiment

Answer 4

asked women to rate the attractiveness and desirability of several kinds of appliances. As a reward, each participant was given a choice between two of the products she had rated as equally attractive. Later, they were asked to rerate all the products.
-Appliance of their choice was rated higher -Appliance rejected was rated drastically lower.

Question 5

How can permanence of decision affect dissonance

Answer 5

The more permanent and irrevocable the decision, the stronger the need to reduce dissonance (Bullens et al., 2013) (the more motivation to reduce dissonance)

Question 6

What is lowballing?

Answer 6

An unscrupulous strategy where a salesperson induces a customer to agree to purchase a product at a low cost, subsequently claims there was an error, and then raises the price, frequently the customer agrees to make the purchase at an inflated price.

Question 7

Why does lowballing work?

Answer 7

1. – a commitment of sorts exists (even if decision reversible). 2. The feeling of commitment triggered the anticipation of an exciting event, to have that thwarted would be a let down. 3. Although price substantially higher than first thought, still only marginally higher than at other dealerships (in car example

Question 8

Justification of effort?

Answer 8

The tendency for individuals to increase their liking for something they have worked hard to attain.

Question 9

Describe Aronson & Mills (1959) experiment on effort and dissonance reduction.

Answer 9

getting into a club experiment, 3 different screening proesses for 3 different group. 1. Was very difficult and demanding screening process. 2, was mildly unpleasant, 3. Admitted to the group with no screening.
Then each group was able to listen to discussion group which was designed to be as dull as possible. Then each participant rated how much they enjoyed it. First group enjoyed it significantly more than the other 2.
People justify the effort they have expended.
The person has to choose to expend that effort.

Question 10

Counterattitudinal Behaviour

Answer 10

Stating an opinion or attitude that runs counter to one’s private belief or attitude.

When we do this with little external justification what we believe begins to conform more and more to the lie we told.

Question 11

External Justification

Answer 11

A reason or an explanation for dissonant personal behaviour that resides outside the individual (e.g., to receive a large reward or avoid a severe punishment). (or knowing that if you told the truth about a friends dress it would hurt their feelings, is also an example of external justification

Question 12

Internal justification

Answer 12

The reduction of dissonance by changing something about onself (eg ones attitude or behaviour). Eg. In dress example might look harder to find something good, in doing so , saying becomes believing.

Question 13

Festinger & Carlsmith (1959) - internal v external justification

Answer 13

students had to spend an hour doing very boring tasks. They were then told that the experiment was one group would be told the tasks were interesting before doing them, to see if that changed how people experienced it. The people that already did the boring experiment had to tell the new students that it was interesting and would receive $1 or $20 and then those students were asked to rate the experience. The students that received $20 still rated them as boring, but those that received $1 started convinced themselves they weren’t that boring, beucase there was only a small external justification they had to reduce the dissonance by changing their attitudes

Question 14

The Ben Franklin effect?

Answer 14

Justifying acts of kindness
- Get someone who doesn’t like you to do you a favour
why? - Behaviour is dissonant with attitude, change attitude about person to resolve dissonance

Question 15

Bercheid, Boye and Walster (1968) - Justifying cruelty

Answer 15

• cruel behaviour is dissonant with view of self as decent human being
  exp - ppants deliver shocks to fellow students. disparaged victim who had no opportunity for retaliation - did not disparage those that did have opportunity for relatioaltion.

-To reduce cognitive dissonance, harm doers might belittle their victims to try and convince themselves they deserve it. If they know that someone can fight back there was less cognitive dissonance, thus no need to demean them.

Question 16

Describe how different intensities of punishment may affect behaviour

Answer 16

If threat of punishment for engaging in a forbidden behaviour is severe:
– There is sufficient external justification for refraining from behaviour
• If punishment is less severe:
– There is insufficient external justification
– Creates greater need for internal justification
– Change attitudes via self-persuasion

Question 17

Describe the forbidden toy study

Answer 17

Aronson (1963) Children rated the attractiveness of toys, then were forbidden to play with toy they found most attractive. 2 groups - severe punishment/mild punishment, 
- neither group played with toy. Then asked to rate toy again, those in severe punishment group rated the same but those in mild punishment rated lower because they experienced greater cognitive dissonance had to come up with a reason why they didn’t play with the toy and ended up changing their attitudes towards it, deciding they didn’t like it as much. Several weeks later the kids were allowed to play with the toys and those in mild punishment chose not to as much.
Replication study (freedman 1965):  
Children who had received a threat of mild punishment were far less likely to play with a forbidden toy (orange bar) than children who had received a threat of severe punishment (blue bar). Those given a mild threat had to provide their own justification by devaluing the attractiveness of the toy (“I didn’t want to play with it anyhow”). The resulting self-persuasion lasted for weeks.

Question 18

Self-Persuasion:

Answer 18

A long-lasting form of attitude change that results from attempts at self-justification.

Question 19

External v internal justification in terms of punishment/self persuasion

Answer 19

insufficient punishment or reward leads to self-justification, which in turn leads to self-persuasion and lasting change. Larger rewards or punishments may produce temporary compliance, which rarely lasts.

Question 20

The hypocrisy paradigm

Answer 20

The arousal of dissonance by having indiviudals make statements that run counter to their behaviours and then reminding them of the inconsistency between what they advocated and their behaviour. The purpose is to lead individuals to more responsible behaviour.

• When people are reminded of their own fallibility/hypocrisy they are more likely to change behaviour.
  eg. Aronson 1981 - dangers of aids and condom use.

Question 21

Difference in dissonance across cultures

Answer 21

Collectivist v individualistic cultures – collectivist might be more likely to experience dissonance when their behaviour shames or disappoints others rather than justifying their own personal behaviour.

Question 22

Explain self-affirmation theory

Answer 22

Another way of reducing dissonance.
- The idea that people can reduce threats to their self-esteem by affirming themselves in areas unrelated to the source of the threat.

Question 23

Self-evaluation maintenance theory, and how to reduce dissonance?

Answer 23

The idea that people experience dissonance when someone close to us outperforms is in an area that is central to our self-esteem. This dissonance can be reduced by becoming less close the the person, changing our behaviour so that we now outperform them, or deciding that the area is not that important to us after all.

Question 24

What 3 conditions have to be met in self-evaluation theory? (Tesser, 1988)

Answer 24

• the person is close to us
• They are outperforming us in a particular area
• That area is central to our self-esteem

Question 25

Describe Terror Management Theory

Answer 25

The theory that holds that self-esteem serves as a buffer, protecting people from terrifying thoughts about their own mortality.
- To stop feelings of anxiety about thoughts of won death, people embrace worldviews that they are effective actors in a meaningful, purposeful world. People with high self-esteem are less troubled by thoughts about their own mortality than people with low self-esteem.

Question 26

Narcissism

Answer 26

Characterised by excessive self love and lack of empathy.