Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here to register today!

Click here to register today!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowReprints and Permissions
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Bagby, R. M.
Right arrow Articles by Bury, A. S.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Bagby, R. M.
Right arrow Articles by Bury, A. S.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, Vol. 16, No. 2, 274-283 (1990)
DOI: 10.1177/0146167290162008
© 1990 Society for Personality and Social Psychology, Inc.

A Comparative Citation Analysis of Attribution Theory and the Theory of Cognitive Dissonance

R. Michael Bagby

Clarke Institute of Psychiatry University of Toronto

James D. A. Parker

York University

Alison S. Bury

Queen Street Mental Health Centre

Though never empirically verified, it is the general consensus among social psychologists that cognitive dissonance is no longer an actively researched area. In contrast, attribution theory is currently regarded as continuing to have a major influence in social psychological research. In order to examine this widely held belief, Leon Festinger's Theory of Cognitive Dissonance and Fritz Heider's Psychology of Interpersonal Relations (1958) were used as source indicators for dissonance and attribution theory, respectively, and citations to these two targets were tabulated for the years 1958-1987 using the Science Citation Index and Social Science Citation Index. As expected, the rate of citation to dissonance theory has decreased substantially during the past 15 years, while citations to attribution theory have remained relatively steady. The pattern of differential citation rates is even more evident within subsets of general psychology journals and social psychology journals. The results are discussed in terms of intellectual, methodological, and theoretical differences between the two theories.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Pers Soc Psychol BullHome page
H. T. Reis and J. Stiller
Publication Trends in JPSP: A Three-Decade Review
Pers Soc Psychol Bull, August 1, 1992; 18(4): 465 - 472.
[Abstract]