Dissonance theory revised again: Comment on the paper by Fazio,Zanna, and Cooper

Fazio, Zanna, and Cooper (Dissonance and self-perception: An integrative view on each theory's proper domain of application. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 1977, 13, 464–479) specified mutually exclusive domains of application for dissonance and self-perception theory and used a misattribution-of-arousal procedure to distinguish between dissonance reduction and self-perception processes. Because their proposed limitations of the domains of the two theories and their use of the misattribution procedure are not directly derivable from earlier statements of either theory, it may be best to regard their analysis as a new theory, rather than as a conciliation of the parent theories. New analyses based on the Fazio et al. results indicate that their data provide an insufficient basis for preferring their theory to earlier versions of dissonance and self-perception theories. Dissonance and self-perception: An integrative view of each theory's proper domain of application. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 1977, 13, 464–479.     

TEACHING COIN EQUIVALENCE TO THE MENTALLY RETARDED1

A program was designed to teach coin equivalence to mentally retarded adolescents. Coin equivalence was defined as choosing several different combinations of coins to equal specified target values. A pretest-posttest matched-groups design was employed with an experimental group receiving the monetary training, and a no-training control group. A multiple baseline across coin-counting responses was also incorporated in the experimental group. Training was divided into six stages, each teaching one specific method of combining coins to equal 10 target values from 5¢ through 50¢. A three-component response chain was used, requiring (a) naming, (b) selecting and counting, and (c) depositing target monetary values into a coin machine. Experimental subjects improved significantly in coin equivalence performance and maintained their skill on follow up tests; control subjects did not.     

The sensory basis of avoidance responding in the rat : Relative dominance of auditory or visual warning signals and safety signals

Three experiments determined the relative degree of stimulus control exerted by the elements of a compound auditory-visual stimulus when this stimulus was presented in various temporal relationships to a barpress avoidance response. When the compound discriminative stimulus for barpress avoidance responding consisted of onset of white noise and onset of either light or darkness, the white noise always exerted dominant control. When the compound discriminative stimulus consisted of offset of white noise and onset of light, neither element controlled avoidance responding. On the other hand, when a barpress avoidance response produced a compound feedback stimulus consisting of onset of white noise and onset of either light or darkness, the visual element always exerted dominant control. When the compound feedback stimulus consisted of offset of white noise and onset of light, both elements exerted stimulus control.     

Third party instigation of aggression as a function of noncooperation and veto power

The purpose of the present study was to test the validity of three hypotheses previously offered to explain the attenuating effects of pacifistic noncooperation on instigative aggression. During part one of the experiment all subjects served as instigators; in the second part they actually set shocks for the target. Subjects instigated either a cooperative or noncooperative confederate, and either did or did not have veto power over the confederate's shock selections. Results of the study indicated that all hypotheses, norm-conformity, compliance, and maintenance of power, were viable for subgroups of subjects. Results were discussed in terms of individual differences and the temporarily inhibiting effects of passive resistance.     

The effect of aversive consequences upon persistent behavior

It was hypothesized that if a behavior is freely engaged in with the expectancy that an aversive consequence will follow, the intrinsic motivation to perform that behavior will increase when the aversive consequence is no longer present. Subjects either worked on a list of anagrams while receiving electric shock on a VR schedule, while being threatened by electric shock, or in the absence of shock. The experimenter then left the subject alone for 10 minutes with a new list of anagrams. Subjects in the shock condition solved more anagrams on the posttest than subjects in the threat-of-shock and noshock conditions. Subjects in both the shock condition and the threat-of-shock condition reported that they spent more of their free time on the anagrams than subjects in the no-shock condition.