Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here for more information

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 arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
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 Shultz, T. R.
Right arrow Articles by Lepper, M. R.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Shultz, T. R.
Right arrow Articles by Lepper, M. R.
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. 25, No. 1, 40-48 (1999)
DOI: 10.1177/0146167299025001004
© 1999 Society for Personality and Social Psychology, Inc.

Free Choice and Cognitive Dissonance Revisited: Choosing "Lesser Evils" Versus "Greater Goods"

Thomas R. Shultz

McGill University, shultz{at}psych.mcgill.ca

Elène Léveillé

McGill University

Mark R. Lepper

Stanford University, lepper{at}psych.stanford.edu

Traditional dissonance theory predicts a spreading apart of chosen and rejected alternatives following a decision. More recent constraint satisfaction models of this classic free-choice paradigm suggest that these effects may vary with the overall attractiveness of the choice options. This prediction was tested with 13-year-olds choosing among posters. As in prior computer simulations, a difficult choice between generally less desirable alternatives produced a large increase in participants’ evaluations of the chosen alternative, whereas a difficult choice between generally more desirable alternatives produced a large decrease in evaluations of the rejected alternative. The results were discussed in terms of the relative amounts of dissonance created in the various conditions. The utility of the consonance constraint satisfaction model that generated these novel predictions was stressed.


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 RevHome page
F. van Overwalle and K. Jordens
An Adaptive Connectionist Model of Cognitive Dissonance
Personality and Social Psychology Review, August 1, 2002; 6(3): 204 - 231.
[Abstract] [PDF]