Generalization of dissonance reduction: Decreasing prejudice through induced compliance.

Abstract

Three studies demonstrated that induced compliance can change socially significant attitudes and that the change generalizes to broader beliefs. White college students wrote an essay endorsing a pro-Black policy that was costly to Whites. In Experiments 1 and 2, attitudes and general beliefs about Blacks became more favorable in both high-and low-choice conditions, provided publicity of the essay was high. Overall, choice and publicity had additive effects on attitude change. Some highchoice Ss wrote only semipositive (semicompliant) essays and did not change their essay attitudes.Yet their beliefs about Blacks still became more favorable. In Experiment 3, racial ambivalence, but not prior attitude, predicted essay compliance (positive or semipositive essay). Ambivalent Ss were more likely to comply than were less ambivalent Ss. Thus, dissonance-mediated change may be facilitated when internal conflict already exists.Can induced compliance be used to reduce prejudice? If so, what are the implications for theories about prejudice and about cognitive dissonance-the process presumed to underlie induced compliance? These questions were the focus of the research reported in this article.

Does Peace Education Make a Difference in the Context of an Intractable Conflict?

“…They said quite explicitly that they could not conceive stepping into the shoes of the oppressors of their brethren. It thus seems to appear that while forced compliance usually works (e.g., Leippe & Eisenstadt, 1994), it can not work in contexts of intractable conflict when feelings are raw, strong and all consuming.…”

Persuasion in ambient intelligence

“…This literature sees the final positive or negative evaluation of an object as a result of several negative and positive evaluations of aspects of the object (Cacioppo and Berntson 1994;Breckler 1994). Interesting from this perspective is that even though a final evaluation of an object might be strongly positive, the ease with which this evaluation can be changed depends not only on the strength-generally it is assumed that strong attitudes are less easily changed (Thompson et al 1995)-but also on the ambivalence of the base of the attitude: The more pro and cons the attitude was based on, the more compliance with a counter attitudinal requests increases (Leippe and Eisenstadt 1994). As such, not merely the presenting of arguments in one specific direction, but also the sheer number of presented arguments might help in shaping an attitude.…”

Reducing the Risk of Disordered Eating Among Female College Students: A Test of Alternative Interventions

“…Based on this idea, individuals who are told to act in a way contrary to previously held attitudes experience cognitive dissonance, which in turn leads them to alter their behaviors or attitudes to reduce the inconsistency (Leippe & Eisenstadt, 1994). The individuals must also believe the new "attitude" was taken on voluntarily, otherwise the inconsistent behavior can be attributed to the demands of the situation and no lasting attitudinal or behavioral changes will result.…”

“…Dissonance theory states that the possession of inconsistent cognitions/beliefs creates psychological discomfort, which motivates people to alter their cognitions or behaviors to restore consistency (Brehm & Cohen, 1962;Festinger, 1957). Based on this idea, individuals who act in ways contrary to previously held attitudes experience cognitive dissonance, which in turn leads them to alter their behaviors or attitudes to reduce the inconsistency 5 ( Leippe & Eisenstadt, 1994). In initial randomized and nonrandomized trials designed to test the efficacy of a dissonance-based intervention, Stice et al (2003) found that women who participated in the dissonance-based programs, which last three hours over three weeks, reported decreases, from baseline to termination, in their thin-ideal internalization, body dissatisfaction, dieting behaviors, negative affect, and bulimic symptoms relative to waitlist and placebo control groups; the majority of the changes remained at the 1-month follow-up.…”