The authors briefly respond to several of the issues raised in the articles commenting on their analysis of research traditions in social psychology and specifically on their treatment of dissonance theory. The authors' goal was not to engage in a protracted debate but to highlight some overarching issues in contemporary social psychology in order to encourage social psychologists to consider how they conduct their science.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Berkowitz, L. (1984). Some effects of thought of anti -and prosocial influences of media events: A cognitive-neoassociation analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 95, 410-427.
2.
Cooper, J. , & Fazio, R. H. (1984). A new look at dissonance theory. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 17, pp. 229-266). Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
3.
Fazio, R. H. (1986). How do attitudes guide behavior? In R. M. Sorrentino & E. T. Higgins (Eds.), Motivation and cognition: Foundations of social behavior (pp. 204-243). New York: Guilford Press.
4.
Frey, D. (1986). Recent research on selective exposure to information. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 19, pp. 41-80). Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
5.
Lord, C. G. , Ross, L., & Lepper, M. R. (1979). Biased assimilation and attitude polarization: The effects of prior theories on subsequently considered evidence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 2098-2109.
6.
Scher, S. J. , & Cooper, J. (1989). Motivational basis of dissonance: The singular role of behavioral consequences. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 56, 899-906.
