Arousal as a necessary condition for attitude change following induced compliance.

This study examined whether arousal is or is not a necessary condition for attitude change in the induced compliance paradigm. In a 2 times 3 design, experimental subjects were induced to write counterattitudinal essays under either high- or low-choice conditions. All subjects were led to believe that a pill, which they had just taken in the context of a separate experiment, was a placebo. In reality, subjects were given a pill that contained either phenobarbital (tranquilizer condition), amphetamine (amphetamine condition), or milk powder (placebo condition). In this last condition, the results yielded the usual dissonance effect: High choice produced more attitude change in the direction of the essay than low choice. When subjects were given a tranquilizer, this effect was virtually eliminated; when subjects were given amphetamine, attitude change increased under high choice and was exhibited for the first time under low choice. These results are consistent with the notion that attitude change is in the service of reducing arousal and with the idea that arousal from other sources can be misattributed to attitude-discrepant behavior.

[1]  T. Brock Effects of prior dishonesty on postdecision dissonance. , 1963, Journal of abnormal and social psychology.

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

[3]  E. O’neal Influence of future choice importance and arousal upon the halo effect , 1971, Integrative Physiological & Behavioral Science.

[4]  J Rodin,et al.  Toward an attribution therapy: the reduction of fear through induced cognitive-emotional misattribution. , 1969, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[5]  J. Cooper Personal responsibility and dissonance: The role of foreseen consequences. , 1971 .

[6]  M. Pallak,et al.  General motivational effects of dissonance arousal. , 1972, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[7]  N. B. Cottrell,et al.  Energizing effects of cognitive dissonance upon dominant and subordinate responses. , 1967, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[8]  E. E. Jones,et al.  Decision freedom as a determinant of the role of incentive magnitude in attitude change. , 1967 .

[9]  L. Goodman,et al.  The Pharmacological Basis of Therapeutics , 1941 .

[10]  J Cooper,et al.  Dissonance and the pill: an attribution approach to studying the arousal properties of dissonance. , 1974, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[11]  S. Worchel,et al.  The Effect of Combined Arousal States on Attitude Change. , 1974 .

[12]  R. Nisbett,et al.  Insomnia and the attribution process. , 1970, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[13]  J. Singer,et al.  Cognitive, social, and physiological determinants of emotional state. , 1962 .

[14]  T. Pittman Attribution of arousal as a mediator in dissonance reduction , 1975 .

[15]  M. Pallak,et al.  Arousal properties of dissonance manipulations. , 1976, Psychological bulletin.

[16]  E. Katkin,et al.  Energizing (dynamogenic) effect of cognitive dissonance on task performance. , 1967, Journal of personality and social psychology.