Double Forced Compliance and Cognitive Dissonance Theory

Girandola, Fabien

doi:10.1080/00224549709595481

Cited by 13 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Our results help us understand why, in past double compliance studies, the execution of a second counterattitudinal behaviour sometimes increased (Joule, 1991a) and sometimes decreased (Girandola, 1996(Girandola, , 1997Joule, 1991b;Joule & Girandola, 1995) the attitude change, depending on the study. The second behaviour increases the dissonance induced by the first if its level of commitment is high, and decreases that dissonance if its level of commitment is low.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 75%

Cognitive dissonance, double forced compliance, and commitment

Joulé¹,

Azdia²

2003

Euro J Social Psych

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Double forced compliance situations are studied to analyse how attitudes change after the performance of two behaviours, rather than just one as in standard forced (or induced) compliance situations. In the present experiment, subjects were asked to execute two successive counterattitudinal behaviours: writing an essay in favour of selective admission to the third year of university (first behaviour) and giving a convincing speech in favour of selective admission (second behaviour). The first behaviour was always performed in a high-commitment context (free choice, publicness, and consequences), whereas the second was performed in a high-commitment context as well as in a lowcommitment context (free choice, anonymity, and no consequences). The following hypotheses were tested. (1) If the second behaviour is performed in a high-commitment context, it will increase the dissonance induced by the first. (2) If the second behaviour is performed in a low-commitment context, it will decrease the dissonance induced by the first. The results confirmed both hypotheses, which comply with the radical version of dissonance theory (Beauvois & Joule, 1996, 1999. As a whole, these results are incompatible with competing theories of Festinger's theory of dissonance (1957), and in particular with self-perception and impression-management theories. Copyright # 2003 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.The double forced (or induced) compliance paradigm is the most famous paradigm in Festinger's theory of cognitive dissonance (1957). Research on forced compliance focuses on the attitude change that follows the execution of one behaviour (such as writing a counterattitudinal essay), whereas research on double forced compliance (for a summary, see Beauvois & Joule, 1996, 1999 focuses on the attitude change that follows the execution of two behaviours. Consider a subject who executes two behaviours: the first one is labelled B1 (writing an essay in favour of selective admission to the third year of study), and the second one is labelled B2 (recording a speech in favour of selective admission). Both are in contradiction with private attitude A (I am against selective admission). One might think that a subject who executed both counterattitudinal behaviours B1 and B2 would have more dissonance to reduce than one who executed only one behaviour. The dissonance aroused by the first and second behaviours should add up and thereby increase the attitude change.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 75%

Cognitive dissonance, double forced compliance, and commitment

Joulé¹,

Azdia²

2003

Euro J Social Psych

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Research utilizing the induced compliance paradigm has generally confirmed Festinger's propositions and supported a positive relationship between perceived choice with attitude and intention change (Fazio, Zanna et al, 1977;Simmons, Webb, & Brandon, 2004). In addition, research has shown that young people engage in dissonance-related attitude change (Leenders & Brukman, 2005), and that the magnitude of cognitive dissonance increases when initial attitudes are made salient (Green, 1974;Ross & Shulman, 1973), when people engage in two dissonant behaviors rather than one behavior (Girandola, 1997), when counter-attitudinal advocacy is believed to result in aversive consequences of which counter-attitudinal advocates are responsible (Cooper & Worchel, 1970;Jones, Brehm, Greenberg, Siman, & Nelson, 1996;Scher & Cooper, 1989), and among people who are characterized by a preference to display consistency between beliefs, thoughts, and behaviors (Nail, Correll, Drake, Glenn, Scott, & Stuckey, 2001).…”

Section: Experimental Paradigms For Inducing Cognitive Dissonancementioning

confidence: 74%

“…In addition, the present study is the first to demonstrate, in the context of exercise, that cognitive dissonance is aversive and rule out the possibility that self-perception processes and cognitive processes related to "aversive consequences" can account for dissonance-related attitude change. Given that all a theory can do is to generate research, we hope that the present findings will encourage young researchers to apply different experimental paradigms (i.e., free choice paradigm, effort paradigm, double forced compliance paradigm; Brehm, 1956;Fazio et al, 1977;Girandola, 1997) to the domains of exercise and sport with the view to test different "self" models of cognitive dissonance theory (Aronson, 1968;Steele, 1988) and explain important phenomena such as attitudes, physical self-esteem, and overconfidence.…”

Section: Downloaded By [University Of Windsor] At 05:02 19 November 2014mentioning

confidence: 94%

An Experimental Test of Cognitive Dissonance Theory in the Domain of Physical Exercise

Chatzisarantis

Hagger

Wang

2008

Journal of Applied Sport Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Attitudes and behavior (i.e., discrimination) are functionally linked (Bem, 1967;Girandola, 1997), and as could be expected, attitudes toward transgender individuals are markedly negative (Norton & Herek, 2013). One explanation for the valence and strength of these attitudes may be their specific content.…”

mentioning

confidence: 85%

Mentally ill, HIV-positive, or sexual predator? Determining myths perceived as representative of transgender people

Locantore

Wasarhaley

2019

Group Processes & Intergroup Relations

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The present study explored possible stereotypical beliefs, or myths, related to prejudice and discrimination toward transgender individuals in the US. In a 5 x 2 x 3 mixed factorial design, Amazon Mechanical Turk workers ( N = 1,450) read a description of a target depicted as a sexual predator, HIV-positive, having a mental illness, an ally of transgender people, or unfair to others. They then completed an intuitive judgment task regarding the target’s gender (male or female) and identity stigma detail (transgender, sexual minority, or no stigmatized detail), and provided feeling thermometer ratings for various groups. Results indicated that participants perceived mental illness as relatively representative of transgender people, but not HIV-status or sexual predation. Feeling thermometer ratings for transgender people were significantly lower than those for other gender/stigma categories and were negatively correlated with participant religiosity and conservatism. We discuss these findings in terms of gendered assumptions and present implications for gender-related stigma and the role of perceived mental illness in antitransgender prejudice.

show abstract

Double Forced Compliance and Cognitive Dissonance Theory

Cited by 13 publications

References 31 publications

Cognitive dissonance, double forced compliance, and commitment

Cognitive dissonance, double forced compliance, and commitment

An Experimental Test of Cognitive Dissonance Theory in the Domain of Physical Exercise

Mentally ill, HIV-positive, or sexual predator? Determining myths perceived as representative of transgender people

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About