pierce for the former, which led it to be used in philosophy of science (especially the corners that analogize belief to scientific theory). on the latter, philosophers love to use "formation" for things that cognitive scientists use "acquisition" for (belief, concept, knowledge). idk the origin
November 10, 2025 at 2:40 PM
pierce for the former, which led it to be used in philosophy of science (especially the corners that analogize belief to scientific theory). on the latter, philosophers love to use "formation" for things that cognitive scientists use "acquisition" for (belief, concept, knowledge). idk the origin
so the underlying impulse being counteracted is individual selfishness rather than tribalism?
November 9, 2025 at 7:04 PM
so the underlying impulse being counteracted is individual selfishness rather than tribalism?
it is interesting that this often seems to be an explicit, harshly enforced code. maybe suggests that it is layered on top of, and counteracting, some underlying tribalistic xenophobic impulse
(nb i know nothing about this topic)
(nb i know nothing about this topic)
November 9, 2025 at 6:02 PM
it is interesting that this often seems to be an explicit, harshly enforced code. maybe suggests that it is layered on top of, and counteracting, some underlying tribalistic xenophobic impulse
(nb i know nothing about this topic)
(nb i know nothing about this topic)
(i have officially exhausted my interest in discussing this online and will be logging off)
November 8, 2025 at 11:58 PM
(i have officially exhausted my interest in discussing this online and will be logging off)
a reasonable assumption is that the older data, and pre-replication crisis psych/neuro/medical findings generally, overestimate effect sizes. but the *existence* of cognitive dissonance as a core construct is well-supported.
and vaidis' advice here is well-taken.
(end)
bsky.app/profile/vaid...
and vaidis' advice here is well-taken.
(end)
bsky.app/profile/vaid...
So hard critic is okay to move forward but Science is much more.
a/ Read the papers (not just abstracts)
b/ Put them in perspective with the full literature
Critique the ethics AND maintain scientific rigor.
#replication #cognitivedissonance #scienticrigor
a/ Read the papers (not just abstracts)
b/ Put them in perspective with the full literature
Critique the ethics AND maintain scientific rigor.
#replication #cognitivedissonance #scienticrigor
November 8, 2025 at 11:58 PM
a reasonable assumption is that the older data, and pre-replication crisis psych/neuro/medical findings generally, overestimate effect sizes. but the *existence* of cognitive dissonance as a core construct is well-supported.
and vaidis' advice here is well-taken.
(end)
bsky.app/profile/vaid...
and vaidis' advice here is well-taken.
(end)
bsky.app/profile/vaid...
often new findings seem to just rediscover/relabel dissonance phenomena, as eric mandelbaum points out. this is not some 90s/00s cottage industry of weird, headline-ready effects that were always suspicious and then failed to replicate root and branch.
bsky.app/profile/eric...
bsky.app/profile/eric...
The counterattitudinal essay paradigm is just one very small part of the theory. Social psychology has had decades of introducing new theories (or new names for old theories) the mechanics of which presuppose the consistency theorizing in dissonance. That is where the theory's strength derives from
November 8, 2025 at 11:58 PM
often new findings seem to just rediscover/relabel dissonance phenomena, as eric mandelbaum points out. this is not some 90s/00s cottage industry of weird, headline-ready effects that were always suspicious and then failed to replicate root and branch.
bsky.app/profile/eric...
bsky.app/profile/eric...
in the case of dissonance, there are many cases of it being rediscovered more recently with contemporary methods (e.g., in the consumer research literature of the past few years on the "meat paradox", where people experience dissonance about meat eating)
November 8, 2025 at 11:58 PM
in the case of dissonance, there are many cases of it being rediscovered more recently with contemporary methods (e.g., in the consumer research literature of the past few years on the "meat paradox", where people experience dissonance about meat eating)
3) how should we think about old psychology today? one lesson from the replication crisis of 10 years ago is that effects are probably much smaller than the older work made it seem.
aside from in-your-face phenomena like visual illusions, the effects are probably not huge (e.g., semantic priming)
aside from in-your-face phenomena like visual illusions, the effects are probably not huge (e.g., semantic priming)
November 8, 2025 at 11:58 PM
3) how should we think about old psychology today? one lesson from the replication crisis of 10 years ago is that effects are probably much smaller than the older work made it seem.
aside from in-your-face phenomena like visual illusions, the effects are probably not huge (e.g., semantic priming)
aside from in-your-face phenomena like visual illusions, the effects are probably not huge (e.g., semantic priming)
the authors concede in a reply to pauer et al. that "skepticism about our [null] results is warranted given the findings related to perceived choice."
so: this was a positive replication of 2 dissonance effects, with some hard-to-interpret data regarding choice. far from the end of dissonance
so: this was a positive replication of 2 dissonance effects, with some hard-to-interpret data regarding choice. far from the end of dissonance
November 8, 2025 at 11:58 PM
the authors concede in a reply to pauer et al. that "skepticism about our [null] results is warranted given the findings related to perceived choice."
so: this was a positive replication of 2 dissonance effects, with some hard-to-interpret data regarding choice. far from the end of dissonance
so: this was a positive replication of 2 dissonance effects, with some hard-to-interpret data regarding choice. far from the end of dissonance
so perhaps this was not really a low-choice condition, but "medium-choice".
then, lishner and pauer et al. analyzed the data and found that, despite the lack of difference between conditions, increases in perceived choice across and within conditions significantly correlate with attitude change!
then, lishner and pauer et al. analyzed the data and found that, despite the lack of difference between conditions, increases in perceived choice across and within conditions significantly correlate with attitude change!
November 8, 2025 at 11:58 PM
so perhaps this was not really a low-choice condition, but "medium-choice".
then, lishner and pauer et al. analyzed the data and found that, despite the lack of difference between conditions, increases in perceived choice across and within conditions significantly correlate with attitude change!
then, lishner and pauer et al. analyzed the data and found that, despite the lack of difference between conditions, increases in perceived choice across and within conditions significantly correlate with attitude change!
but the "low-choice" participants did not indicate that they felt unfree: instead, they indicated a mean of 4.44 on a scale of 1-9 (9 being the most free), and "high-choice" had a mean of 6.50.
as the authors note in a follow-up paper, this is higher than "low-choice" in *over 90%* of studies (!!)
as the authors note in a follow-up paper, this is higher than "low-choice" in *over 90%* of studies (!!)
November 8, 2025 at 11:58 PM
but the "low-choice" participants did not indicate that they felt unfree: instead, they indicated a mean of 4.44 on a scale of 1-9 (9 being the most free), and "high-choice" had a mean of 6.50.
as the authors note in a follow-up paper, this is higher than "low-choice" in *over 90%* of studies (!!)
as the authors note in a follow-up paper, this is higher than "low-choice" in *over 90%* of studies (!!)
first, the "low-choice" condition was just a regular experiment: people were asked to do a task and freely chose to do it, or not. the difference is that "high-choice" involved *reminding them* that they were free to do it or not.
this had an effect: HC participants said they felt freer than LC
this had an effect: HC participants said they felt freer than LC
November 8, 2025 at 11:58 PM
first, the "low-choice" condition was just a regular experiment: people were asked to do a task and freely chose to do it, or not. the difference is that "high-choice" involved *reminding them* that they were free to do it or not.
this had an effect: HC participants said they felt freer than LC
this had an effect: HC participants said they felt freer than LC
as somebody who is very interested in dissonance theory, i had seen the preregistration for this project many years ago and was excitedly awaiting the results. i was very glad to see that the core dissonance phenomena replicated.
so what is going on with the choice variable?
so what is going on with the choice variable?
November 8, 2025 at 11:58 PM
as somebody who is very interested in dissonance theory, i had seen the preregistration for this project many years ago and was excitedly awaiting the results. i was very glad to see that the core dissonance phenomena replicated.
so what is going on with the choice variable?
so what is going on with the choice variable?
croyle & cooper originally found that choice did matter. vaidis et al. did not replicate this: high-choice and low-choice were the same.
however, this was not because there was no evidence for dissonance effects, it was rather because dissonance effects were observed for *both* conditions
however, this was not because there was no evidence for dissonance effects, it was rather because dissonance effects were observed for *both* conditions
November 8, 2025 at 11:58 PM
croyle & cooper originally found that choice did matter. vaidis et al. did not replicate this: high-choice and low-choice were the same.
however, this was not because there was no evidence for dissonance effects, it was rather because dissonance effects were observed for *both* conditions
however, this was not because there was no evidence for dissonance effects, it was rather because dissonance effects were observed for *both* conditions
why? because if you chose to write a counterattitudinal essay, that is more incongruous with your original attitude than if you were forced to do so. so, perhaps (?) bc it decreases the strength of the dissonance or bc it allows for easier rationalization, low-choice might decrease the effect
November 8, 2025 at 11:58 PM
why? because if you chose to write a counterattitudinal essay, that is more incongruous with your original attitude than if you were forced to do so. so, perhaps (?) bc it decreases the strength of the dissonance or bc it allows for easier rationalization, low-choice might decrease the effect
the view that inconsistency creates negative affect and motivates rationalization (i.e., cognitive dissonance theory in its simplest form) makes no predictions about choice.
but some dissonance theorists, like cooper, predict that choice should modulate the effect
but some dissonance theorists, like cooper, predict that choice should modulate the effect
November 8, 2025 at 11:58 PM
the view that inconsistency creates negative affect and motivates rationalization (i.e., cognitive dissonance theory in its simplest form) makes no predictions about choice.
but some dissonance theorists, like cooper, predict that choice should modulate the effect
but some dissonance theorists, like cooper, predict that choice should modulate the effect
it replicated *both* of these findings: people who wrote counterattitudinal essays experienced negative feelings caused by inconsistency, and changed their attitudes in the expected direction.
however, croyle and cooper also had another independent variable: whether Ps freely chose to do the task
however, croyle and cooper also had another independent variable: whether Ps freely chose to do the task
November 8, 2025 at 11:58 PM
it replicated *both* of these findings: people who wrote counterattitudinal essays experienced negative feelings caused by inconsistency, and changed their attitudes in the expected direction.
however, croyle and cooper also had another independent variable: whether Ps freely chose to do the task
however, croyle and cooper also had another independent variable: whether Ps freely chose to do the task
but one way is to shift your attitudes toward the essay, reducing inconsistency.
croyle and cooper, consistent with earlier work, found that participants did experience negative feelings, and did change their attitudes. however, the study was probably underpowered. what did the replication find?
croyle and cooper, consistent with earlier work, found that participants did experience negative feelings, and did change their attitudes. however, the study was probably underpowered. what did the replication find?
November 8, 2025 at 11:58 PM
but one way is to shift your attitudes toward the essay, reducing inconsistency.
croyle and cooper, consistent with earlier work, found that participants did experience negative feelings, and did change their attitudes. however, the study was probably underpowered. what did the replication find?
croyle and cooper, consistent with earlier work, found that participants did experience negative feelings, and did change their attitudes. however, the study was probably underpowered. what did the replication find?
dissonance theory predicts that "counterattitudinal" behavior should cause cognitive dissonance: a negatively valenced feeling caused by inconsistency. it also predicts that people should change their attitudes around to avoid inconsistency. there are many ways to do this!
November 8, 2025 at 11:58 PM
dissonance theory predicts that "counterattitudinal" behavior should cause cognitive dissonance: a negatively valenced feeling caused by inconsistency. it also predicts that people should change their attitudes around to avoid inconsistency. there are many ways to do this!
2) the terrific multilab replication study published in 2024 by @vaidis.bsky.social and colleagues. they replicated a paper from 1983 by croyle and cooper, in which participants wrote essays that either agreed with or disagreed with their attitudes. first, what does dissonance theory predict?
November 8, 2025 at 11:58 PM
2) the terrific multilab replication study published in 2024 by @vaidis.bsky.social and colleagues. they replicated a paper from 1983 by croyle and cooper, in which participants wrote essays that either agreed with or disagreed with their attitudes. first, what does dissonance theory predict?
so doubts about the scientific standards of "When Prophecy Fails" are not new, or especially relevant to dissonance theory.
it's not very different from concerns re: the story about ben franklin flying a kite in a lightning storm; relevant for history, not so much for the study of electromagnetism
it's not very different from concerns re: the story about ben franklin flying a kite in a lightning storm; relevant for history, not so much for the study of electromagnetism
November 8, 2025 at 11:58 PM
so doubts about the scientific standards of "When Prophecy Fails" are not new, or especially relevant to dissonance theory.
it's not very different from concerns re: the story about ben franklin flying a kite in a lightning storm; relevant for history, not so much for the study of electromagnetism
it's not very different from concerns re: the story about ben franklin flying a kite in a lightning storm; relevant for history, not so much for the study of electromagnetism
there now exist decades of research on how members of new religious movements react to false predictions which broadly supports the basic idea, namely, that people rationalize in order to preserve beliefs they've invested a lot into in the face of strong counterevidence
bsky.app/profile/eric...
bsky.app/profile/eric...
This is all p misleading IMO. I just saw this link so haven't read it yet (but will, though I also think lots of the retweets of this haven't read it as well, given its provenance). I don't see how this counters (eg) Dawson 1999 which goes through 13 millennial cults and finds 12 show the effect 1/n
November 8, 2025 at 11:58 PM
there now exist decades of research on how members of new religious movements react to false predictions which broadly supports the basic idea, namely, that people rationalize in order to preserve beliefs they've invested a lot into in the face of strong counterevidence
bsky.app/profile/eric...
bsky.app/profile/eric...