Self-Perception: An alternative interpretation of cognitive dissonance phenomena

A theory of self-perception is proposed to provide an alternative interpretation for several of the major phenomena embraced by Festinger's theory of cognitive dissonance and to explicate some of the secondary patterns of data that have appeared in dissonance experiments. It is suggested that the attitude statements which comprise the major dependent variables in dissonance experiments may be regarded as interpersonal judgments in which the observer and the observed happen to be the same individual and that it is unnecessary to postulate an aversive motivational drive toward consistency to account for the attitude change phenomena observed. Supporting experiments are presented, and metatheoretical contrasts between the "radical " behavioral approach utilized and the phenomenological approach typified by dissonance theory are discussed

Diffusion Of Responsibility And Level Of Risk Taking In Groups 1

This study reports evidence supporting the following propositions: (1) Group discussion and consensus concerning decisions that involve actual risk ana payoffs lead to greater risk taking than occurs in the absence of such discussion and consensus. (2) The mechanism that underlies this group‐induced shift toward greater risk taking consists of a diffusion or spreading of responsibility. Using risks and payoffs based on monetary gain and loss for problem‐solving performance, the above propositions received strong confirmation for male college subjects. The results of various experimental manipulations provided positive support for viewing diffusion of responsibility as the causal factor at work.Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/108279/1/ets200956.pd

Group Influence On Individual Risk Taking 1

Does group interaction lead to greater conservatism or to greater risk taking in decisions than would obtain were the decisions arrived at individually.–or is there an averaging effect? This question was investigated with a procedure in which the protagonist in each of 12 everyday life situations must choose between two courses of action, one of which involves considerably more risk than the other but also is much more rewarding if successful. The S must decide on the lowest level of probability for the success of the risky alternative that he would deem sufficient to warrant its choice. A total of 218 liberal arts university students participated in the study. In the experimental condition, the S s first arrived at individual decisions concerning each of the 12 situations; then, they were brought together in discussion groups of six with the request that they reach a group consensus on each decision; and afterward, they were asked to make all their decisions privately once again. Some S s also made private decisions yet another time two to six weeks later. The group members' judgments of one another's relative degrees of influence and of popularity within the group also were obtained. There were 14 all‐male and 14 all‐female groups. In the control condition, S s made their decisions individually each of two times with one week intervening, under instructions the second time that encouraged them to change rather than simply to recall their earlier decisions. It was found that (1) group decisions exhibit greater risk taking than appears in pre‐discussion individual decisions; (2) post‐discussion private decisions exhibit the same increase in risk taking as occurs in the group decisions; (3) the increase in risk taking resulting from the discussion process is still maintained after a subsequent period of two to six weeks has elapsed; (4) no shift in risk taking level occurs over time in the absence of the discussion process; and (5) degree of risk taking in pre‐discussion individual decisions and degree of judged influence within the group are positively related. Two interpretations of these findings were suggested, either or both of which may apply: (1) the knowledge that one's decisions are being made jointly with others leads to a diffusion of personal responsiblity, the outcome of which is an increased willingness to take risks; (2) high risk takers are more likely to take the initiative in social situations, with the result that they become more influential in the group.Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/108371/1/ets200112.pd

Nativism Revisited: A review of Eric H. Lenneberg's Biological Foundations of Language

Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/96685/1/jeab.1968.11-497.pd

Beliefs, attitudes and human affairs/ Bem

114 hal.; 21 cm

Beliefs, attitudes and human affairs/ Bem

114 hal.; 21 cm