Cognitive Dissonance and Post‐Decision Attitude Change in Six Presidential Elections

Data from the National Election Studies were examined in an effort to isolate cognitive dissonance of two kinds: dissonance arising from a behavioral commitment in the form of voting, and dissonance arising from inconsistencies associated with having supported the losing candidate. Feeling thermometer ratings of the two principal presidential candidates obtained before and immediately after six elections (1972, 1980, 1984, 1988, 1992, and 1996) were analyzed. Regression estimates supported a dissonance reduction explanation of observed attitude changes. Voters, as compared to nonvoters, tended to increase the evaluative distance between candidates after an election, whereas supporters of the losing candidate were more likely than supporters of the winning candidate to decrease such evaluative distances. An additional examination of voters yielded results consistent with dissonance theory: After the election, respondents reporting favorable evaluations of both candidates (a difficult choice) tended to spread comparative candidate evaluations compared to respondents who were favorable toward only one candidate (an easy choice). The results both support and cast doubt on prior studies.

[1]  Steven E. Finkel,et al.  Causal Analysis With Panel Data , 1995, SAGE Research Methods Foundations.

[2]  M. Rokeach.  Book Reviews: The Open and Closed Mind. Investigations into the nature of belief systems and personality systems , 1961 .

[3]  G. W. Walster,et al.  Choice between Negative Alternatives: Dissonance Reduction or Regret? , 1970 .

[4]  Angus Campbell,et al.  The American voter , 1960 .

[5]  Benjamin Ginsberg,et al.  The Consequences of Consent: Elections, Citizen Control and Popular Acquiescence , 1982 .

[6]  H. J. Greenwald,et al.  Dissonance and relative versus absolute attractiveness of decision alternatives. , 1969, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[7]  C. Anderson,et al.  Political Institutions and Satisfaction with Democracy: A Cross-National Analysis of Consensus and Majoritarian Systems , 1997, American Political Science Review.

[8]  THE OPERATION OF COGNITIVE DISSONANCE ON PRE- AND POSTELECTION ATTITUDES. , 1964, The Journal of social psychology.

[9]  Susan T. Fiske,et al.  Affective and semantic components in political person perception. , 1982 .

[10]  L. Festinger,et al.  A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance , 2017 .

[11]  J. Brehm.  Postdecision changes in the desirability of alternatives. , 1956, Journal of abnormal psychology.

[12]  B. Zippel.  Change in Attitude of Party Switchers before and after an Election , 1980 .

[13]  E. Harmon-Jones,et al.  Cognitive dissonance: Progress on a pivotal theory in social psychology. , 1999 .

[14]  Thomas R. Shultz,et al.  Free Choice and Cognitive Dissonance Revisited: Choosing “Lesser Evils” Versus “Greater Goods” , 1999 .

[15]  S. Presser,et al.  Questions and Answers in Attitude Surveys: Experiments on Question Form, Wording, and Context , 1996 .

[16]  A. Doob,et al.  Post-decision dissonance at the polling booth. , 1976 .

[17]  T. Cook,et al.  Quasi-experimentation: Design & analysis issues for field settings , 1979 .

[18]  M. Kilduff,et al.  Optimism About Elections: Dissonance Reduction at the Ballot Box , 1988 .

[19]  Edward Brent,et al.  When prophecy bends: The preference–expectation link in U.S. presidential elections, 1952–1980. , 1983 .

[20]  Paul R. Abramson,et al.  Who Overreports Voting? , 1986, American Political Science Review.

[21]  J. Brehm,et al.  Explorations in Cognitive Dissonance , 1962 .

[22]  Murray Edelman,et al.  The symbolic uses of politics , 1967 .

[23]  Linda Simon,et al.  Trivialization: the forgotten mode of dissonance reduction. , 1995 .

[24]  R. Nadeau,et al.  Accepting the Election Outcome: The Effect of Participation on Losers' Consent , 1993, British Journal of Political Science.

[25]  H. Gerard,et al.  Postdecision evaluation of choice alternatives as a function of valence of alternatives, choice, and expected delay of choice consequences , 1981 .

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

[27]  Duane T. Wegener,et al.  Attitudes and attitude change. , 1997, Annual review of psychology.

[28]  Benjamin Ginsberg,et al.  Elections and the Mobilization of Popular Support , 1978 .

[29]  L. Festinger.  Conflict, Decision, and Dissonance , 1964 .

[30]  R. E. Knox,et al.  Postdecision dissonance at post time. , 1968, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[31]  J. Cooper,et al.  Cognitive dissonance in an intergroup context. , 1983 .

[32]  R. L. Savage,et al.  Candidates and their images: Concepts, methods, and findings , 1976 .

[33]  J. Zaller,et al.  WHO GETS THE NEWS? ALTERNATIVE MEASURES OF NEWS RECEPTION AND THEIR IMPLICATIONS FOR RESEARCH , 1993 .

[34]  Larry M. Bartels.  Uninformed Votes: Information E ects in Presidential Elections , 1996 .

[35]  F. Heider.  Attitudes and cognitive organization. , 1946, The Journal of psychology.

[36]  Subject Population, Thought Modality, and Cognitive Dissonance , 1988 .

[37]  Joel Cooper,et al.  Motivational basis of dissonance: the singular role of behavioral consequences. , 1989 .

[38]  D. Granberg,et al.  Attitude Change in an Electoral Context as a Function of Expectations Not Being Fulfilled , 1986 .