The Validation of Dissonance versus Impression-Management Theories

• Published in: The Journal of social psychology Vol. 100; no. 2; pp. 199 - 206
• Main Authors: Klusman, James E., Hautaluoma, Jacob E.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Worcester, Mass Taylor & Francis Group 01.12.1976; Clark University Press
• Subjects: Indexing in process
• ISSN: 0022-4545; 1940-1183
• DOI: 10.1080/00224545.1976.9711930

Three experiments were designed to determine whether dissonance theory or impression-management theory provides a more adequate explanation of attitude change within the confines of the "counterattitudinal advocacy" experimental paradigm. The designs employed were a simple manipulation in the laboratory, a more complex laboratory design, and a field experiment closely replicating other designs which had successfully produced attitude change using counterattitudinal advocacy. The results indicated no significant attitude change in any of the experimental attempts. It was concluded that both dissonance and impression management theory may be too broadly defined, in view of the variety of phenomena they attempt to explain.