Abstract
Our main purpose was to explore hypotheses derived from the Identification of Action Theory in a particular situation that is, a dissonant situation. Thus, we varied the identification (low versus high-level) of a problematic behavior (to stop speaking for 24 hours) in the forced compliance paradigm. Two modes of dissonance reduction were presented: cognitive rationalization (classical attitude-change) and behavioral rationalization (target behavior: to stop speaking for 48 hours). As predicted, the results showed that high-level identity of action leads to cognitive rationalization whereas low-level identity leads to behavioural rationalization. Thus, participants identifying the problematic behavior at a low-level were more inclined to accept the target behavior, compared with participants identifying their problematic behavior at a higher-level. These results are of particular interest for understanding the extent to which the understanding of the discrepant act interferes with the cognitive processes of dissonance reduction.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.