Role playing, incentive, and dissonance.

Abstract

Incentive theory is advanced as more satisfactory than dissonance theory in dealing with attitude change induced through role playing. Incentive theory and dissonance theory yield opposite predictions about attitudinal results of role playing which involves different incentive levels. Experimental studies in this area are reviewed, and alternative explanations are discussed. Results which appear to support dissonance theory can generally be attributed to the arousal of interfering negative affect by increasing reward levels. When opportunity for instigation of such interfering reactions is low, increased reward may lead to more effective biased scanning and thus to more attitude change. Complicating factors are noted,

A Critical Reexamination of the Practice Component in Counselor Training

“…Consequently, it would be remiss not to acknowledge it here. A review of this extensive related literature reveals three general categories of research on the effects of role play: role playas a means of producing attitude and opinion change (Carlson, 1956;Cohen, 1964;Culbertson, 1957;Elms, 1967;Elms & Janis, 1965;Hovland, Janis, & Kelley, 1953;Janis & Gilmore, 1965;Janis & King, 1954;Kelman, 1953;King &Janis, 1956); role playas a means of producing personality and behavioral change (Efran & Korn, 1969;Friedman, 1971;Harrow, 1952;Janis & Mann, 1965;Kelly, Blake, & Stromberg, 1957;Maier, 1952;Mann, 1958;Mann & Mann, 1960;McGuire, 1964;Moreno, 1940Moreno, , 1946Moreno, , 1952Moreno, , 1955Moreno, , 1962Zimbardo, 1965); and role playas a research method (Cooper, 1976;Geller, 1978;Greenberg, 1967;Kelman, 1967;Spencer, 1978;Vinacke, 1954). This research has generally indicated that role play can be effectively employed in changing attitudes and opinions, that it is a useful therapeutic process when applied to specific situation problems, and that as a research method it presents problems of experimental validity.…”

Social Norms, Behavioral Payment Programs, and Cooperative Behaviors: Toward a Theory of Financial Incentives in Normative Systems

“…There is robust experimental literature testing the effects of monetary incentives on attitudes (cf., Deci et al, 1999;Schlenker, Forsyth, Leary, & Miller, 1980) and meta-analysis data indicating that financial incentives can reduce intrinsic motivations (Deci et al, 1999). Studies of counter-attitudinal advocacy and forced compliance have posited self-presentational (Schlenker et al, 1980), dissonance-based (e.g., Festinger & Carlsmith, 1959), and incentive theory (Elms, 1967) explanations for the effects of incentives on attitude shifts. Our interest here, however, is in the role of money in normative systems as related to, but distinct from, attitudinal systems.…”

Attitudes and Opinions

“…The incentive theorists assume that higher incentives for counter attitudinal advocacy produce more "biased scanning" of arguments already available to the subject, and invention of new arguments, and thus greater self-persuasion (74,116,203). This has been a problem for dissonance theorists, since it has proven difficult to mea sure dissonance reduction in terms other than those of the main dependent variable [here, attitude change, though see Gerard (91) for some useful altern atives].…”

“…Two competing theoretical viewpoints have their spokes men: Janis(116),Elms (74), and Rosenberg (202,203). Two competing theoretical viewpoints have their spokes men: Janis(116),Elms (74), and Rosenberg (202,203).…”