In The Classic Dissonance Experiment, Which Group Had More Attitude Change?

Allow's return one time more to our friend Joachim and imagine that we at present notice that over the next two weeks he has spent virtually every nighttime at clubs listening to music rather than studying. And these behaviors are starting to have some astringent consequences: he but plant out that he's failed his biology midterm. How volition he e'er explicate that to his parents? What were at offset relatively small discrepancies between cocky-concept and behavior are starting to snowball, and they are starting to have more than affective consequences. Joachim is realizing that he'south in big trouble—the inconsistencies between his prior attitudes near the importance of schoolwork and his behavior are creating some pregnant threats to his positive self-esteem. As we saw in our give-and-take of cocky-sensation theory, this discomfort that occurs when we deport in ways that we see every bit inconsistent, such as when we fail to live upwardly to our own expectations, is called cognitive noise (Cooper, 2007; Festinger, 1957; Harmon-Jones & Mills, 1999). The discomfort of cognitive dissonance is experienced every bit pain, showing up in a part of the brain that is particularly sensitive to pain—the inductive cingulate cortex (van Veen, Krug, Schooler, & Carter, 2009).

Leon Festinger and J. Merrill Carlsmith (1959) conducted an important study designed to demonstrate the extent to which behaviors that are discrepant from our initial beliefs can create cerebral dissonance and tin can influence attitudes. College students participated in an experiment in which they were asked to piece of work on a task that was incredibly boring (such as turning pegs on a peg board) and lasted for a total hour. Afterwards they had finished the task, the experimenter explained that the assistant who normally helped convince people to participate in the study was unavailable and that he could employ some help persuading the side by side person that the chore was going to exist interesting and enjoyable. The experimenter explained that it would exist much more convincing if a boyfriend student rather than the experimenter delivered this message and asked the participant if he would exist willing do to information technology. Thus with his request the experimenter induced the participants to lie about the chore to another educatee, and all the participants agreed to practice so.

The experimental manipulation involved the corporeality of money the students were paid to tell the lie. One-half of the students were offered a large payment ($20) for telling the prevarication, whereas the other half were offered only a small payment ($1) for telling the prevarication. After the participants had told the lie, an interviewer asked each of them how much they had enjoyed the chore they had performed earlier in the experiment. As y'all can see in Figure 4.10, Festinger and Carlsmith found that the students who had been paid $20 for maxim the tasks had been enjoyable rated the task as very boring, which indeed information technology was. In contrast, the students who were paid simply $1 for telling the lie changed their mental attitude toward the chore and rated it as significantly more interesting.

Festinger explained the results of this study in terms of consistency and inconsistency among cognitions. He hypothesized that some thoughts might be dissonant, in the sense that they made usa feel uncomfortable, while other thoughts were more consonant, in the sense that they fabricated us feel good. He argued that people may feel an uncomfortable land (which he called cognitive dissonance) when they have many dissonant thoughts—for instance, between the idea that (a) they are smart and decent people and (b) they nevertheless told a lie to another student for merely a small-scale payment.

Festinger argued that the people in his experiment who had been induced to lie for just $i experienced more cerebral dissonance than the people who were paid $xx because the latter group had a strong external justification for having done it whereas the erstwhile did not. The people in the $1 status, Festinger argued, needed to convince themselves that that the task was really interesting to reduce the dissonance they were experiencing.

media/image10.png

Figure iv.10 Festinger and Carlsmith

Participants who had engaged in a boring task and then told another student it was interesting experienced cognitive dissonance, leading them to rate the chore more positively in comparison to those who were paid $20 to do the aforementioned. Data are from Festinger and Carlsmith (1959). Festinger, L., & Carlsmith, J. M. (1959). Cerebral consequences of forced compliance. Periodical of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 58, 203–210.

Although originally considered in terms of the inconsistency among dissimilar cognitions, Festinger's theory has too been practical to the negative feelings that we feel when there is inconsistency betwixt our attitudes and our behavior, and specially when the behavior threatens our perceptions of ourselves as adept people (Aronson, 1969). Thus Joachim is likely feeling cognitive dissonance because he has acted confronting his amend judgment and these behaviors are having some existent consequences for him. The dissonant thoughts involve (a) his perception of himself equally a hardworking student, compared with (b) his recent behaviors that exercise not support that thought. Our expectation is that Joachim volition not enjoy these negative feelings and will attempt to become rid of them.