Switch wiring for LynTec SS-2PL, SS-2DPL, SS-2LRP and SS-4LRP
1. Ss perform very dull task, repeatedly. 2. Ss asked to inform next subject that the task is...
22
1. Ss perform very dull task, repeatedly. 2. Ss asked to inform next subject that the task is interesting. 3. Ss offered low pay ($1) or high pay ($20) to lie. 4. Ss later asked to rate how interesting they found the task. Festinger & Carlsmith, 1959 "Believing Own Lies" Which group experiences most dissonance? $1 $20 X Which group rates the task as more interesting? $1 $20 X Why? $1 = low justification dissonance $20 = high justification
-
Upload
abel-richard -
Category
Documents
-
view
213 -
download
0
Transcript of 1. Ss perform very dull task, repeatedly. 2. Ss asked to inform next subject that the task is...
1. Ss perform very dull task, repeatedly.
2. Ss asked to inform next subject that the task is interesting.
3. Ss offered low pay ($1) or high pay ($20) to lie.
4. Ss later asked to rate how interesting they found the task.
Festinger & Carlsmith, 1959"Believing Own Lies"
Which group experiences most dissonance?
$1$20
X
Which group rates the task as more interesting?
$1$20
X
Why? $1 = low justification dissonance
$20 = high justification no dissonance
1. Child rates toys, including desirable "Robbie the Robot".
2. E. leaves room, tells child "don't play w' Robbie, and if you do:"a. Low threat: I will be a little annoyed with you.b. High threat: I will be very angry, and will do something.
3. Child returns to study later, new E., can play with any toy including R. the R.
4. Which child plays w' R the R? Low threat or high threat? Why?
Low threat High threatX
Low threat = under-justification dissonance
Why?
Dissonance and Behavioral Control: Robbie the Robot Study Lepper, 1972
Dissonance Disrupts Behaviorism
Premise of behaviorism: Punishments are negatively reinforcing. Question: What conditions produce more liking of neutral stims?
Neutral Stimuli
Dull discussion group
Fill bin with spools
Mediocre toys
Reinforcement
Embarrassment
Low pay
Punishment threat
Dislike
Dislike
Dislike
Liking
Liking
Liking
Beh. Predicts CD Shows
Self Perception Theory Challenges Cog. Dissonance
Cog. Dissonance Theory: Discordance btwn. actions and beliefs creates negative arousal. Hence, dissonance is motivational/affective
Daryl Bem: No need to posit any underlying arousal. Could be purely self-perception. People evaluate own actions as they would others.
NOTE: Harks back to "Symbolic Interactionism"
No internal conflict or complex motives, just attributions based on self-observed behavior.
Testing Self-Perception Vs. Dissonance Bem & McConnell, 1970
Premise: We infer own attitudes from our most recent behavior. Beh. due to "insufficient justification", infer corresponding attitude.
After new attitude adopted, old attitude will be forgotten.
No "change in attitude" Instead earlier attitude "overwritten" by self-perceived new attitude.
Method: Counter-Attitudinal Essay, low justification vs. high justification
DV: Attitude recall
Result: Which group better recalls initial attitude, low or high justification?High justification. Why?
Saw selves voicing views under powerful external pressure. Views voiced under pressure probably not sincere.
Arousal as a Necessary Condition for Cog. Diss. and Attitude Change
Cooper, Zanna, & Taves, 1978
Premise: Damn you Bem, it is arousal!!!!
If arousal, then if arousal dampened, less CD; if arousal boosted, more CD
"Attitudes will change following counter-attitudinal behavior if and only if arousal accompanies behavior."
Method: Ss complete counter-attitudinal essay--"Should Richard Nixon be pardoned?" Either high-choice or low choice conditions.
Before essay, as part of "separate study" Ss ingest pill. Told it is placebo but in actuality it is either: tranquilizer, placebo, amphetamine
Predict: Attitude change in "high choice" but not if pill is _____________?Tranquilizer
Arousal as a Necessary Condition for Cog. Diss. and Attitude Change
Cooper, Zanna, & Taves, 1978
Tranq'zer
Class 21:
Self Affirmation
Name Calling, Compliance, and an Alternative Means to Dissonance Reduction
Steele name-calling study:
Most dissonance studies involve S seeing self behaving contrary to self-image. What if outside person did so?
Method: Calls housewives in Utah (why Utah?) Housewives in one of four extp'l conditions
1. Relevant negative name: "you are not cooperative" 2. Relevant positive name: "you are cooperative"
3. Irrelevant negative name: "you are a bad driver" 4. No contact control group.
DV: Compliance with food co-op request, to list all foods, 2 days later.
According to Dissonance, which group should comply?
X
0102030405060708090
100
RelevantNegative
RelevantPositive
IrrelevantNegative
Control
Co
mp
lian
ce
Name Calling and ComplianceSteele, 1985
What explains this result? Why didn't earlier CD research show similar result? Never checked!
The Role of the Self in Cognitive Dissonance
Dissonance induced by:
1. Writing essays you don’t believe in. 2. Reading lurid sexual text in front of leering experimenter 3. Lying about interest value of boring task for just $1.00 4. Breaking a stranger’s camera 5. Eating grasshoppers with minimal incentive 6. Waiting until 4:30 AM for space ship that never arrives
Experientially, what do these situations have in common?
Make people feel badly about themselves.
1. People have a basic need to maintain fundamental sense of self as worthy
2. After self worth has been threatened, people are motivated to restore general integrity, not simply correct the specific threat.
3. Motive to correct a specific threat is lessened after restoring general sense of worthiness.
Principles of Self Affirmation Theory
Logic of Self Affirmation vs. Dissonance
Fred is a smoker. Fred sees self as smart and sane. Smart, sane people don’t smoke.How can Fred reduce psychological threat?
Rationalize "I watch diet, so I'll be OK"
Change behavior "OK, I'm quitting"
Boost self-worth "I just published an article on cognitive dissonance!"
Cog. Diss Self-Affirm
Y
Y
Y
Y
YN
Countering Dissonance by Affirming Values:Steele & Lui, 1981
Complete Poli/Econ Values Survey
Low Justification(High Choice)
High Justification(Low Choice)
Hold Poli/Econ Values
No AttitudeChange
No AttitudeChange
Don’t Hold Poli/Econ Values
Attitude Change
No AttitudeChange
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
Low Choice HighChoice/No
Aff.
HighChoic/Val.
Irrel.
HighChoice/Val
Rel.
Co
mp
lian
ce
Dissonance and Values AffirmationSteele & Lui, 1981
What explains this result? Why didn't earlier CD research show similar result? Never checked!
Dissonance and the Lab Coat Steele & Lui, 1983
Ss pre-identified: science oriented or not science oriented
Ss rate record albums: can choose 5th or 6th favorite (choice cond) are given either 5th or 6th favorite (no-choice cond)
While "ratings are reviewed", Ss go to "second study"
Second study: wear lab coat / don't wear lab coat
Ss return to Study 1, reveal "true attitudes" re. albums
DV: Degree of attitude change regarding albums
Not Sci. oriented
Sci. oriented
No Lab Coat Lab Coat
Attitude change Attitude change
Attitude change No Attitude change
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
1.4
Not ScienceOriented
ScienceOriented
De
gre
e o
f A
ttit
ud
e C
ha
ng
e
No Lab CoatLab Coat
Dissonance and the Lab Coat Steele & Lui, 1983
Self Affirmation and the Need to Judge Others Lui & Steele, 1986
Econ/Political Values Oriented
Not Econ/Political Values Oriented
Helplessness Only
Helplessness + Affirmation
High Judging High Judging
High Judging Low Judging
Judging others is pleasurable.
More likely to judge others when we feel less in control. Why?
Would affirmation affect tendency to judge others? Why?
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Not Value-Oriented
Value-Oriented
Ju
dg
ing
Oth
ers
HelplessnessOnlyHelplessness+Affirmation
Self Affirmation and the Need to Judge Others Lui & Steele, 1986
Reducing Biased Evaluation by Affirming the Self Cohen, Aronson, & Steele, 2000
Premise: People hold firmly to opinions, esp. those connected to core values. Would flexibility re. opinions relax if self-worth affirmed. (Why?)
Method: Ss pre-selected on favoring/not favoring capital punishment. Ss also rank personal values "Sources of Validation" scale
Ss told study concerns memory, Complete "Personal Memory Exercise":
Affirmation Cond: Describe 3-4 instances where they upheld top source of validation (from S of V) scale
Control Cond: List everything they ate last 48 hrs.
Ss read & recall capital punish. essay opposed to their views
DV: How favorably is anti-attitude essay evaluated?
-0.3-0.25-0.2
-0.15-0.1
-0.050
0.050.1
0.150.2
0.25
Affirmed Not Affirmed
Fav
ora
bil
ity
Rat
ing
Reducing Biased Evaluation by Affirming the Self Cohen, Aronson, & Steele, 2000
Self Affirmation Questions
1. If one kind of self-insult (i.e., dissonant behavior, lack of control) can be redeemed by a very different kind of self-relevant behavior (i.e., recalling personal values, wearing a lab coat, cooperating with crazy survey) what does this say about the nature of the self? Is the self a unified whole or a
conglomeration of parts?
2. How would self affirmation affect the tendency to self-blame following a tragedy over which one has objectively little control (like earthquake)? Why?
