![]() These results are of particular interest for understanding the extent to which the understanding of the discrepant act interferes with the cognitive processes of dissonance reduction. How Enjoyable: For Control Group: rated somewhat negatively (-.45) For 1 Dollar Group: magnitude of dissonance HIGH, pressure to reduce dissonance, also high-rated significantly more positively (+1.35) For 20 Dollar Group:Less dissonance, less dissonance, less need for dissonance reduction-rated only slightly higher. ![]() Thus, participants identifying the problematic behavior at a low-level were more inclined to accept the target behavior, compared with participants identifying their problematic behavior at a higher-level. As predicted, the results showed that high-level identity of action leads to cognitive rationalization whereas low-level identity leads to behavioural rationalization. Two modes of dissonance reduction were presented: cognitive rationalization (classical attitude-change) and behavioral rationalization (target behavior: to stop speaking for 48 hours). Thus, we varied the identification (low versus high-level) of a problematic behavior (to stop speaking for 24 hours) in the forced compliance paradigm. Our main purpose was to explore hypotheses derived from the Identification of Action Theory in a particular situation that is, a dissonant situation.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |