Well-known literature reviews from the 1960s question whether cognitive dissonance underlies experimental participants' selective exposure of themselves to consonant messages and avoidance of dissonant ones. A meta-analytic review of 16 studies published from 1956 to 1996 and involving 1,922 total participants shows that experimental tests consistently support the supposition that dissonance is associated with selective exposure (r = .22, p < .001). Statistical power exceeded .99. Advances in statistical methodology and increased attention to selecting appropriate tests of dissonance theory were essential to finally resolving this question.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AdamsJ. S. (1961) Reduction of cognitive dissonance by seeking consonant information. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 62, 74–78.
2.
BrockT. C.AlbertS. M.BeckerL. A. (1970) Familiarity, utility, and supportiveness as determinants of information receptivity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 14, 292–301.
3.
BrodbeckM. (1956) The role of small groups in mediating the effects of propaganda. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 52, 166–170.
4.
CookT.LevitonL (1980) Reviewing the literature: a comparison of traditional methods with meta-analysisJournal of Personality, 48, 449–472.
5.
CottonJ. L.HieserR. A. (1980) Selective exposure to information and cognitive dissonance. Journal of Research in Personality, 14, 518–527.
6.
FeatherN. T. (1963) Cognitive dissonance, sensitivity and evaluation. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 66, 157–163.
7.
FestingerL. (1957) A theory of cognitive dissonance.Stanford, CA: Stanford Univer. Press.
8.
FreedmanI. L. (1965a) Confidence, utility, and selective exposure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2, 778–780.
9.
FreedmanJ. L. (1965b) Preference for dissonant information. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2, 287–289.
10.
FreedmanJ. L.SearsD. O. (1965) Selective exposure. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 2, 57–97.
11.
FreyD. (1981) Postdecisional preference for decision-relevant information as a function of the competence of its source and the degree of familiarity with this information. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 17, 51–67.
12.
FreyD.RoschM. (1984) Information seeking after decisions: the role of novelty of information and decision reversibility. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 10, 91–98.
13.
GuerreroJ. L. (1969) Avoidance, relevance and exposure to discrepant information. Journalism Monographs, 14, 39–54.
14.
HunterJ. E.SchmidtF. L. (1990) Methods of meta-analysis.Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
15.
InnesJ. M. (1978) Selective exposure as a function of dogmatism and incentive. The Journal of Social Psychology, 106, 261–265.
16.
JeckerJ. D. (1964) Selective exposure to new information. In FestingerL. (Ed.), Conflict, decision and dissonance.Stanford, CA: Stanford Univer. Press. Pp. 65–81.
17.
KlapperJ. (1960) The effects of mass communication.New York: Free Press.
18.
KleckR. E.WheatonJ. (1967) Dogmatism and responses to opinion-consistent and opinion-inconsistent information. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 5, 249–252.
19.
LaVoieA. L.ThompsonS. K. (1972) Selective exposure in a field setting. Psychological Reports, 31, 433–434.
20.
McCroskeyJ. C.PrichardS. V. O. (1967) Selective-exposure and Lyndon B. Johnson's 1966 “State of the Union” address. Journal of Broadcasting, 11, 331–337.
21.
NemethC.RogersJ. (1996) Dissent and the search for information. British Journal of Social Psychology, 35, 67–76.
22.
SearsD. O.FreedmanJ. L. (1967/1971) Selective exposure to information: a critical review. In SchrammW.RobertsD. F. (Eds.), The process and effects of mass communication. (Rev. ed.) Urbana, IL: Univer. of Illinois Press. Pp. 209–235.
