If I may follow-up on this (because something more just occurred to
me): if Brehm had not eliminated the subjects who chose the less-
desired object, then on the second rating of the objects the lower
rated objects would have been rated higher and no "spread" would have
occurred and so no support for "post decisional dissonance"? Do I
have that right?
Michael
www.psychfilespodcast.com
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Jul 12, 2008, at 7:41 AM, Michael Britt wrote:
I've been pouring over the blog posts and articles written by John
Tierney and Keith Chen regarding cognitive dissonance and the Monty
Hall problem. I have to tell you - it's been a bit difficult to get
clarity on all this, but I thought it's a topic that would be of
interest to my listeners. I understand the Monty Hall problem (that
was kinda fun figuring that one out) and I read the 1956 article by
Jack Brehm ("Postdecisional Changes in the Desirability of
Alternatives") and I think I see the problem there, but can anyone
tell me if I'm seeing the connection between these two correctly?
The Monty Hall problem is that when one door is eliminated from the
game we think (incorrectly) that we now have a 50-50 chance of being
right and that eliminating the one door had no effect on our odds of
winning. In the study by Brehm, he eliminated the group of subjects
who chose the low rated object (toaster, coffee maker, etc.) on the
belief that this wouldn't affect the statistics. Now, if I
understand this correctly, what Chen and Tierney are saying is that
eliminating these subjects from the study was like eliminating one
door from the Monty Hall game: eliminating the subjects actually
does change things. That is, the reason why the subjects who
remained in the study ranked their choice higher on the re-ranking
exercise is not that they experienced dissonance and needed to think
that their choice was the best one, but rather that they simply
liked their choice and were re-affirming this ("we shouldn't be
surprised that people like the things they chose").
Do I have this right? Or is there something I'm missing here?
Appreciate any feedback on this.
Michael
www.psychfilespodcast.com
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
To make changes to your subscription contact:
Bill Southerly ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
---
To make changes to your subscription contact:
Bill Southerly ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
