Taking a Closer Look: Reasserting the Role of the Self-Concept in Dissonance Theory

In an early revision of Festinger's theory of cognitive dissonance, Aronson argued that dissonance was aroused when an important element of the self-concept was violated. More recently, Cooper and Fazio's "New Look" version of the theory maintains that dissonance is the result of feeling personally responsible for an aversive outcome. This article examines the claims of these two positions, ultimately arguing for the superiority of Aronson's formulation. The authors maintain that research findings in support of the New Look can also be explained by the self-concept formulation. In addition, they argue that the twin postulates of the New Look position-personal responsibility and aversive consequences-lack adequate conceptual grounding without reference to the self-concept. Finally, previous research is examined that is incompatible with the New Look, as well as new data suggesting that aversive consequences are not necessary for dissonance arousal.

[1]  M. Snyder.  Self-monitoring of expressive behavior. , 1974 .

[2]  Gilda F. Epstein.  Machiavelli and the devil's advocate. , 1969 .

[3]  Elliot Aronson,et al.  Using Cognitive Dissonance to Encourage Water Conservation) , 1992 .

[4]  E. Aronson,et al.  Performance expectancy as a determinant of actual performance. , 1962, Journal of abnormal and social psychology.

[5]  J. Freedman.  Long-term behavioral effects of cognitive dissonance. , 1965 .

[6]  E. Aronson,et al.  Overcoming denial and increasing the intention to use condoms through the induction of hypocrisy. , 1991, American journal of public health.

[7]  E. Walster,et al.  Assignment of responsibility for an accident. , 1966, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[8]  E. Aronson,et al.  Opinion change in the advocate as a function of the persuasibility of his audience: a clarification of the meaning of dissonance. , 1969, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[9]  Elliot Aronson,et al.  The effect of severity of initiation on liking for a group. , 1959 .

[10]  M. Zanna,et al.  Mistreatment of an esteemed other as a consequence affecting dissonance reduction , 1974 .

[11]  Elliot Aronson,et al.  The Theory of Cognitive Dissonance: A Current Perspective1 , 1969 .

[12]  J. Cooper,et al.  Effects of expected effort on attitude change prior to exposure , 1967 .

[13]  E. E. Jones,et al.  Changes in interpersonal perception as a means of reducing cognitive dissonance. , 1960, Journal of abnormal and social psychology.

[14]  J. Cooper,et al.  Pre-exposure persuasion as a result of commitment to pre-exposure effort , 1968 .

[15]  J. Cooper,et al.  A New Look at Dissonance Theory , 1984 .

[16]  Elliot Aronson,et al.  Effect of the severity of threat on the devaluation of forbidden behavior. , 1963 .

[17]  Claude M. Steele,et al.  DISSONANCE PROCESSES AS SELF-AFFIRMATION , 1983 .

[18]  E. Tanke,et al.  Behavior and attitude: Some people are more consistent than others. , 1976 .

[19]  C. Steele.  The Psychology of Self-Affirmation: Sustaining the Integrity of the Self , 1988 .

[20]  E. Aronson,et al.  Dishonest behavior as a function of differential levels of induced self-esteem. , 1968, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[21]  Stephen J. Read,et al.  Acquiring Self-Knowledge: The Search for Feedback That Fits , 1981 .

[22]  S. Milgram.  BEHAVIORAL STUDY OF OBEDIENCE. , 1963, Journal of abnormal psychology.

[23]  D. C. Glass.  CHANGES IN LIKING AS A MEANS OF REDUCING COGNITIVE DISCREPANCIES BETWEEN SELF-ESTEEM AND AGGRESSION. , 1964, Journal of personality.

[24]  S. Worchel,et al.  Role of undesired consequences in arousing cognitive dissonance. , 1970 .