"Not for All the Tea in China!" Political Ideology and the Avoidance of Dissonance-Arousing Situations

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

People often avoid information and situations that have the potential to contradict previously held beliefs and attitudes (i.e., situations that arouse cognitive dissonance). According to the motivated social cognition model of political ideology, conservatives tend to have stronger epistemic needs to attain certainty and closure than liberals. This implies that there may be differences in how liberals and conservatives respond to dissonance-arousing situations. In two experiments, we investigated the possibility that conservatives would be more strongly motivated to avoid dissonance-arousing tasks than liberals. Indeed, U.S. residents who preferred more conservative presidents (George W. Bush and Ronald Reagan) complied less than Americans who preferred more liberal presidents (Barack Obama and Bill Clinton) with the request to write a counter-attitudinal essay about who made a "better president." This difference was not observed under circumstances of low perceived choice or when the topic of the counter-attitudinal essay was non-political (i.e., when it pertained to computer or beverage preferences). The results of these experiments provide initial evidence of ideological differences in dissonance avoidance. Future work would do well to determine whether such differences are specific to political issues or topics that are personally important. Implications for political behavior are discussed.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Article numbere59837
JournalPLoS One
Volume8
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Apr 19 2013

Fingerprint

Cognitive Dissonance
Beverages
Tea
cognition
Cognition
beverages
tea
China
Experiments

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Agricultural and Biological Sciences(all)
  • Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology(all)
  • Medicine(all)

Cite this

"Not for All the Tea in China!" Political Ideology and the Avoidance of Dissonance-Arousing Situations. / Nam, H. Hannah; Jost, John T.; Van Bavel, Jay J.

In: PLoS One, Vol. 8, No. 4, e59837, 19.04.2013.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{9502593d4901421db6f66c6e7fa201d6,
title = "{"}Not for All the Tea in China!{"} Political Ideology and the Avoidance of Dissonance-Arousing Situations",
abstract = "People often avoid information and situations that have the potential to contradict previously held beliefs and attitudes (i.e., situations that arouse cognitive dissonance). According to the motivated social cognition model of political ideology, conservatives tend to have stronger epistemic needs to attain certainty and closure than liberals. This implies that there may be differences in how liberals and conservatives respond to dissonance-arousing situations. In two experiments, we investigated the possibility that conservatives would be more strongly motivated to avoid dissonance-arousing tasks than liberals. Indeed, U.S. residents who preferred more conservative presidents (George W. Bush and Ronald Reagan) complied less than Americans who preferred more liberal presidents (Barack Obama and Bill Clinton) with the request to write a counter-attitudinal essay about who made a {"}better president.{"} This difference was not observed under circumstances of low perceived choice or when the topic of the counter-attitudinal essay was non-political (i.e., when it pertained to computer or beverage preferences). The results of these experiments provide initial evidence of ideological differences in dissonance avoidance. Future work would do well to determine whether such differences are specific to political issues or topics that are personally important. Implications for political behavior are discussed.",
author = "Nam, {H. Hannah} and Jost, {John T.} and {Van Bavel}, {Jay J.}",
year = "2013",
month = "4",
day = "19",
doi = "10.1371/journal.pone.0059837",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "8",
journal = "PLoS One",
issn = "1932-6203",
publisher = "Public Library of Science",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - "Not for All the Tea in China!" Political Ideology and the Avoidance of Dissonance-Arousing Situations

AU - Nam, H. Hannah

AU - Jost, John T.

AU - Van Bavel, Jay J.

PY - 2013/4/19

Y1 - 2013/4/19

N2 - People often avoid information and situations that have the potential to contradict previously held beliefs and attitudes (i.e., situations that arouse cognitive dissonance). According to the motivated social cognition model of political ideology, conservatives tend to have stronger epistemic needs to attain certainty and closure than liberals. This implies that there may be differences in how liberals and conservatives respond to dissonance-arousing situations. In two experiments, we investigated the possibility that conservatives would be more strongly motivated to avoid dissonance-arousing tasks than liberals. Indeed, U.S. residents who preferred more conservative presidents (George W. Bush and Ronald Reagan) complied less than Americans who preferred more liberal presidents (Barack Obama and Bill Clinton) with the request to write a counter-attitudinal essay about who made a "better president." This difference was not observed under circumstances of low perceived choice or when the topic of the counter-attitudinal essay was non-political (i.e., when it pertained to computer or beverage preferences). The results of these experiments provide initial evidence of ideological differences in dissonance avoidance. Future work would do well to determine whether such differences are specific to political issues or topics that are personally important. Implications for political behavior are discussed.

AB - People often avoid information and situations that have the potential to contradict previously held beliefs and attitudes (i.e., situations that arouse cognitive dissonance). According to the motivated social cognition model of political ideology, conservatives tend to have stronger epistemic needs to attain certainty and closure than liberals. This implies that there may be differences in how liberals and conservatives respond to dissonance-arousing situations. In two experiments, we investigated the possibility that conservatives would be more strongly motivated to avoid dissonance-arousing tasks than liberals. Indeed, U.S. residents who preferred more conservative presidents (George W. Bush and Ronald Reagan) complied less than Americans who preferred more liberal presidents (Barack Obama and Bill Clinton) with the request to write a counter-attitudinal essay about who made a "better president." This difference was not observed under circumstances of low perceived choice or when the topic of the counter-attitudinal essay was non-political (i.e., when it pertained to computer or beverage preferences). The results of these experiments provide initial evidence of ideological differences in dissonance avoidance. Future work would do well to determine whether such differences are specific to political issues or topics that are personally important. Implications for political behavior are discussed.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84876448596&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84876448596&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1371/journal.pone.0059837

DO - 10.1371/journal.pone.0059837

M3 - Article

C2 - 23620724

AN - SCOPUS:84876448596

VL - 8

JO - PLoS One

JF - PLoS One

SN - 1932-6203

IS - 4

M1 - e59837

ER -