Explaining Preferences from Behavior A Cognitive Dissonance Approach

The standard approach in positive political theory posits that action choices are the consequences of preferences. Social psychology—in particular, cognitive dissonance theory—suggests the opposite: preferences may themselves be affected by action choices. We present a framework that applies this id...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inThe Journal of politics Vol. 80; no. 2; pp. 400 - 411
Main Authors Acharya, Avidit, Blackwell, Matthew, Sen, Maya
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published Chicago University of Chicago on behalf of the Southern Political Science Association 01.04.2018
University of Chicago Press
Subjects
Cognitive dissonance
Cognitive psychology
Cognitive-behavioral factors
Hostility
Minority & ethnic violence
Partisanship
Political behavior
Political parties
Political science
Political science theories
Political theory
Preferences
Social psychology
Two-party systems
Violence
formal theory
empathy
ethnic violence
cognitive dissonance
partisanship
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

More Information
Summary:The standard approach in positive political theory posits that action choices are the consequences of preferences. Social psychology—in particular, cognitive dissonance theory—suggests the opposite: preferences may themselves be affected by action choices. We present a framework that applies this idea to three models of political choice: (1) one in which partisanship emerges naturally in a two-party systemdespite policy beingmultidimensional, (2) one in which interactions with people who express different views can lead to empathetic changes in political positions, and (3) one in which ethnic or racial hostility increases after acts of violence. These examples demonstrate how incorporating the insights of social psychology can expand the scope of formalization in political science.
ISSN:0022-3816
1468-2508
DOI:10.1086/694541