A Multilab Replication of the Induced-Compliance Paradigm of Cognitive Dissonance

David C.  Vaidis; Willem W. A.  Sleegers; Florian van Leeuwen; Kenneth G.  DeMarree; Bjørn Sætrevik; Robert M. Ross; Kathleen  Schmidt; John Protzko; Coby Morvinski; Omid Ghasemi; Andrew J. Roberts; Jeff Stone; Alexandre Bran; Amélie Gourdon-Kanhukamwe; Ceren Gunsoy; Lisa S. Moussaoui; Andrew R.  Smith; Armelle Nugier; Marie-Pierre Fayant; Ali H. Al-Hoorie; Obed K.  Appiah; Spencer Arbige; Benjamin Aubert-Teillaud; Olga Bialobrzeska; Stéphanie Bordel; Valerian Boudjemadi; Hilmar Brohmer; Quinn Cabooter; Mehdi Chahir; Ianis Chassang; Armand Chatard; Yu Yang  Chou; Sungeun Chung; Mioara Cristea; Joséphine Daga; Gregory J. Depow; Olivier Desrichard; Dmitrii Dubrov; Thomas R. Evans; Séverine Falkowicz; Sylvain Ferreira; Tim  Figureau; Valérie  Fointiat; Théo  Friedrich; Anastasia Gashkova; Fabien Girandola; Marine Granjon; Dmitry  Grigoryev; Gul Gunaydin; Şevval Güzel; Mahsa Hazrati; Mai Helmy; Ayumi Ikeda; Michael Inzlicht; Sara Jaubert; Dauren Kasanov; Mohammad Mohsen Khoddami; Taenyun Kim; Kiyoshi Kiyokawa; Rabia I. Kodapanakkal; Alexandra Kosachenko; Kortney Maedge; John H. Mahaney; Marie-Amélie Martinie; Vitor N. Mascheretti; Yoriko Matsuda; Maxime Mauduy; Nicolas Mauny; Armand Metzen; Eva Moreno-Bella; Miguel Moya; Kévin Nadarajah; Pegah Nejat; Elisabeth Norman; Irmak Olcaysoy Okten; Asil A. Özdoğru; Ceyda Ozer; Elena Padial-Rojas; Yuri G. Pavlov; Monica Perusquia-Hernandez; Dora Proost; Aleksandra Rabinovitch; Odile Rohmer; Emre Selcuk; Cécile Sénémeaud; Yaniv Shani; Elena A. Shmeleva; Emmelie Simoens; Kaitlin A. Smith; Alain Somat; Hayeon Song; Fatih Sonmez; Lionel Souchet; John J. Taylor; Ilja van Beest; Nicolas van der Linden; Steven Verheyen; Bruno Verschuere; Kevin Vezirian; Luc Vieira; Sera Wiechert; Guillermo B. Willis; Robin Wollast; Ji Xia; Yuki Yamada; Naoto Yoshimura; Daniel Priolo

doi:10.1177/25152459231213375

A Multilab Replication of the Induced-Compliance Paradigm of Cognitive Dissonance

David C. Vaidis^*, Willem W. A. Sleegers, Florian van Leeuwen, Kenneth G. DeMarree, Bjørn Sætrevik, Robert M. Ross, Kathleen Schmidt, John Protzko, Coby Morvinski, Omid Ghasemi, Andrew J. Roberts, Jeff Stone, Alexandre Bran, Amélie Gourdon-Kanhukamwe, Ceren Gunsoy, Lisa S. Moussaoui, Andrew R. Smith, Armelle Nugier, Marie-Pierre Fayant, Ali H. Al-HoorieObed K. Appiah, Spencer Arbige, Benjamin Aubert-Teillaud, Olga Bialobrzeska, Stéphanie Bordel, Valerian Boudjemadi, Hilmar Brohmer, Quinn Cabooter, Mehdi Chahir, Ianis Chassang, Armand Chatard, Yu Yang Chou, Sungeun Chung, Mioara Cristea, Joséphine Daga, Gregory J. Depow, Olivier Desrichard, Dmitrii Dubrov, Thomas R. Evans, Séverine Falkowicz, Sylvain Ferreira, Tim Figureau, Valérie Fointiat, Théo Friedrich, Anastasia Gashkova, Fabien Girandola, Marine Granjon, Dmitry Grigoryev, Gul Gunaydin, Şevval Güzel, Mahsa Hazrati, Mai Helmy, Ayumi Ikeda, Michael Inzlicht, Sara Jaubert, Dauren Kasanov, Mohammad Mohsen Khoddami, Taenyun Kim, Kiyoshi Kiyokawa, Rabia I. Kodapanakkal, Alexandra Kosachenko, Kortney Maedge, John H. Mahaney, Marie-Amélie Martinie, Vitor N. Mascheretti, Yoriko Matsuda, Maxime Mauduy, Nicolas Mauny, Armand Metzen, Eva Moreno-Bella, Miguel Moya, Kévin Nadarajah, Pegah Nejat, Elisabeth Norman, Irmak Olcaysoy Okten, Asil A. Özdoğru, Ceyda Ozer, Elena Padial-Rojas, Yuri G. Pavlov, Monica Perusquia-Hernandez, Dora Proost, Aleksandra Rabinovitch, Odile Rohmer, Emre Selcuk, Cécile Sénémeaud, Yaniv Shani, Elena A. Shmeleva, Emmelie Simoens, Kaitlin A. Smith, Alain Somat, Hayeon Song, Fatih Sonmez, Lionel Souchet, John J. Taylor, Ilja van Beest, Nicolas van der Linden, Steven Verheyen, Bruno Verschuere, Kevin Vezirian, Luc Vieira, Sera Wiechert, Guillermo B. Willis, Robin Wollast, Ji Xia, Yuki Yamada, Naoto Yoshimura, Daniel Priolo

^*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

3 Citations (Scopus)

71 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

According to cognitive-dissonance theory, performing counterattitudinal behavior produces a state of dissonance that people are motivated to resolve, usually by changing their attitude to be in line with their behavior. One of the most popular experimental paradigms used to produce such attitude change is the induced-compliance paradigm. Despite its popularity, the replication crisis in social psychology and other fields, as well as methodological limitations associated with the paradigm, raise concerns about the robustness of classic studies in this literature. We therefore conducted a multilab constructive replication of the induced-compliance paradigm based on Croyle and Cooper (Experiment 1). In a total of 39 labs from 19 countries and 14 languages, participants (N = 4,898) were assigned to one of three conditions: writing a counterattitudinal essay under high choice, writing a counterattitudinal essay under low choice, or writing a neutral essay under high choice. The primary analyses failed to support the core hypothesis: No significant difference in attitude was observed after writing a counterattitudinal essay under high choice compared with low choice. However, we did observe a significant difference in attitude after writing a counterattitudinal essay compared with writing a neutral essay. Secondary analyses revealed the pattern of results to be robust to data exclusions, lab variability, and attitude assessment. Additional exploratory analyses were conducted to test predictions from cognitive-dissonance
theory. Overall, the results call into question whether the induced-compliance paradigm provides robust evidence for cognitive dissonance.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	1-26
Number of pages	26
Journal	Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science
Volume	7
Issue number	1
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1177/25152459231213375
Publication status	Published - 5 Feb 2024

Keywords

attitude change
cognitive dissonance
counterattitudinal essay
induced compliance
multilabs
replication

Access to Document

10.1177/25152459231213375Licence: CC BY-NC

Download pdf
© The Author(s) 2024.
Final published version, 2.27 MBLicence: CC BY-NC

Cite this

Vaidis, D. C., Sleegers, W. W. A., van Leeuwen, F., DeMarree, K. G., Sætrevik, B., Ross, R. M., Schmidt, K., Protzko, J., Morvinski, C., Ghasemi, O., Roberts, A. J., Stone, J., Bran, A., Gourdon-Kanhukamwe, A., Gunsoy, C., Moussaoui, L. S., Smith, A. R., Nugier, A., Fayant, M.-P., ... Priolo, D. (2024). A Multilab Replication of the Induced-Compliance Paradigm of Cognitive Dissonance. Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science, 7(1), 1-26. https://doi.org/10.1177/25152459231213375

@article{4c2b85cfccb8460cac063d6496c1d0c5,

title = "A Multilab Replication of the Induced-Compliance Paradigm of Cognitive Dissonance",

abstract = "According to cognitive-dissonance theory, performing counterattitudinal behavior produces a state of dissonance that people are motivated to resolve, usually by changing their attitude to be in line with their behavior. One of the most popular experimental paradigms used to produce such attitude change is the induced-compliance paradigm. Despite its popularity, the replication crisis in social psychology and other fields, as well as methodological limitations associated with the paradigm, raise concerns about the robustness of classic studies in this literature. We therefore conducted a multilab constructive replication of the induced-compliance paradigm based on Croyle and Cooper (Experiment 1). In a total of 39 labs from 19 countries and 14 languages, participants (N = 4,898) were assigned to one of three conditions: writing a counterattitudinal essay under high choice, writing a counterattitudinal essay under low choice, or writing a neutral essay under high choice. The primary analyses failed to support the core hypothesis: No significant difference in attitude was observed after writing a counterattitudinal essay under high choice compared with low choice. However, we did observe a significant difference in attitude after writing a counterattitudinal essay compared with writing a neutral essay. Secondary analyses revealed the pattern of results to be robust to data exclusions, lab variability, and attitude assessment. Additional exploratory analyses were conducted to test predictions from cognitive-dissonancetheory. Overall, the results call into question whether the induced-compliance paradigm provides robust evidence for cognitive dissonance.",

keywords = "attitude change, cognitive dissonance, counterattitudinal essay, induced compliance, multilabs, replication",

author = "Vaidis, {David C.} and Sleegers, {Willem W. A.} and {van Leeuwen}, Florian and DeMarree, {Kenneth G.} and Bj{\o}rn S{\ae}trevik and Ross, {Robert M.} and Kathleen Schmidt and John Protzko and Coby Morvinski and Omid Ghasemi and Roberts, {Andrew J.} and Jeff Stone and Alexandre Bran and Am{\'e}lie Gourdon-Kanhukamwe and Ceren Gunsoy and Moussaoui, {Lisa S.} and Smith, {Andrew R.} and Armelle Nugier and Marie-Pierre Fayant and Al-Hoorie, {Ali H.} and Appiah, {Obed K.} and Spencer Arbige and Benjamin Aubert-Teillaud and Olga Bialobrzeska and St{\'e}phanie Bordel and Valerian Boudjemadi and Hilmar Brohmer and Quinn Cabooter and Mehdi Chahir and Ianis Chassang and Armand Chatard and Chou, {Yu Yang} and Sungeun Chung and Mioara Cristea and Jos{\'e}phine Daga and Depow, {Gregory J.} and Olivier Desrichard and Dmitrii Dubrov and Evans, {Thomas R.} and S{\'e}verine Falkowicz and Sylvain Ferreira and Tim Figureau and Val{\'e}rie Fointiat and Th{\'e}o Friedrich and Anastasia Gashkova and Fabien Girandola and Marine Granjon and Dmitry Grigoryev and Gul Gunaydin and {\c S}evval G{\"u}zel and Mahsa Hazrati and Mai Helmy and Ayumi Ikeda and Michael Inzlicht and Sara Jaubert and Dauren Kasanov and Khoddami, {Mohammad Mohsen} and Taenyun Kim and Kiyoshi Kiyokawa and Kodapanakkal, {Rabia I.} and Alexandra Kosachenko and Kortney Maedge and Mahaney, {John H.} and Marie-Am{\'e}lie Martinie and Mascheretti, {Vitor N.} and Yoriko Matsuda and Maxime Mauduy and Nicolas Mauny and Armand Metzen and Eva Moreno-Bella and Miguel Moya and K{\'e}vin Nadarajah and Pegah Nejat and Elisabeth Norman and Okten, {Irmak Olcaysoy} and {\"O}zdoğru, {Asil A.} and Ceyda Ozer and Elena Padial-Rojas and Pavlov, {Yuri G.} and Monica Perusquia-Hernandez and Dora Proost and Aleksandra Rabinovitch and Odile Rohmer and Emre Selcuk and C{\'e}cile S{\'e}n{\'e}meaud and Yaniv Shani and Shmeleva, {Elena A.} and Emmelie Simoens and Smith, {Kaitlin A.} and Alain Somat and Hayeon Song and Fatih Sonmez and Lionel Souchet and Taylor, {John J.} and {van Beest}, Ilja and {van der Linden}, Nicolas and Steven Verheyen and Bruno Verschuere and Kevin Vezirian and Luc Vieira and Sera Wiechert and Willis, {Guillermo B.} and Robin Wollast and Ji Xia and Yuki Yamada and Naoto Yoshimura and Daniel Priolo",

year = "2024",

month = feb,

day = "5",

doi = "10.1177/25152459231213375",

language = "English",

volume = "7",

pages = "1--26",

journal = "Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science",

issn = "2515-2459",

publisher = "Sage",

number = "1",

}

Vaidis, DC, Sleegers, WWA, van Leeuwen, F, DeMarree, KG, Sætrevik, B, Ross, RM, Schmidt, K, Protzko, J, Morvinski, C, Ghasemi, O, Roberts, AJ, Stone, J, Bran, A, Gourdon-Kanhukamwe, A, Gunsoy, C, Moussaoui, LS, Smith, AR, Nugier, A, Fayant, M-P, Al-Hoorie, AH, Appiah, OK, Arbige, S, Aubert-Teillaud, B, Bialobrzeska, O, Bordel, S, Boudjemadi, V, Brohmer, H, Cabooter, Q, Chahir, M, Chassang, I, Chatard, A, Chou, YY, Chung, S, Cristea, M, Daga, J, Depow, GJ, Desrichard, O, Dubrov, D, Evans, TR, Falkowicz, S, Ferreira, S, Figureau, T, Fointiat, V, Friedrich, T, Gashkova, A, Girandola, F, Granjon, M, Grigoryev, D, Gunaydin, G, Güzel, Ş, Hazrati, M, Helmy, M, Ikeda, A, Inzlicht, M, Jaubert, S, Kasanov, D, Khoddami, MM, Kim, T, Kiyokawa, K, Kodapanakkal, RI, Kosachenko, A, Maedge, K, Mahaney, JH, Martinie, M-A, Mascheretti, VN, Matsuda, Y, Mauduy, M, Mauny, N, Metzen, A, Moreno-Bella, E, Moya, M, Nadarajah, K, Nejat, P, Norman, E, Okten, IO, Özdoğru, AA, Ozer, C, Padial-Rojas, E, Pavlov, YG, Perusquia-Hernandez, M, Proost, D, Rabinovitch, A, Rohmer, O, Selcuk, E, Sénémeaud, C, Shani, Y, Shmeleva, EA, Simoens, E, Smith, KA, Somat, A, Song, H, Sonmez, F, Souchet, L, Taylor, JJ, van Beest, I, van der Linden, N, Verheyen, S, Verschuere, B, Vezirian, K, Vieira, L, Wiechert, S, Willis, GB, Wollast, R, Xia, J, Yamada, Y, Yoshimura, N & Priolo, D 2024, 'A Multilab Replication of the Induced-Compliance Paradigm of Cognitive Dissonance', Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science, vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 1-26. https://doi.org/10.1177/25152459231213375

TY - JOUR

T1 - A Multilab Replication of the Induced-Compliance Paradigm of Cognitive Dissonance

AU - Vaidis, David C.

AU - Sleegers, Willem W. A.

AU - van Leeuwen, Florian

AU - DeMarree, Kenneth G.

AU - Sætrevik, Bjørn

AU - Ross, Robert M.

AU - Schmidt, Kathleen

AU - Protzko, John

AU - Morvinski, Coby

AU - Ghasemi, Omid

AU - Roberts, Andrew J.

AU - Stone, Jeff

AU - Bran, Alexandre

AU - Gourdon-Kanhukamwe, Amélie

AU - Gunsoy, Ceren

AU - Moussaoui, Lisa S.

AU - Smith, Andrew R.

AU - Nugier, Armelle

AU - Fayant, Marie-Pierre

AU - Al-Hoorie, Ali H.

AU - Appiah, Obed K.

AU - Arbige, Spencer

AU - Aubert-Teillaud, Benjamin

AU - Bialobrzeska, Olga

AU - Bordel, Stéphanie

AU - Boudjemadi, Valerian

AU - Brohmer, Hilmar

AU - Cabooter, Quinn

AU - Chahir, Mehdi

AU - Chassang, Ianis

AU - Chatard, Armand

AU - Chou, Yu Yang

AU - Chung, Sungeun

AU - Cristea, Mioara

AU - Daga, Joséphine

AU - Depow, Gregory J.

AU - Desrichard, Olivier

AU - Dubrov, Dmitrii

AU - Evans, Thomas R.

AU - Falkowicz, Séverine

AU - Ferreira, Sylvain

AU - Figureau, Tim

AU - Fointiat, Valérie

AU - Friedrich, Théo

AU - Gashkova, Anastasia

AU - Girandola, Fabien

AU - Granjon, Marine

AU - Grigoryev, Dmitry

AU - Gunaydin, Gul

AU - Güzel, Şevval

AU - Hazrati, Mahsa

AU - Helmy, Mai

AU - Ikeda, Ayumi

AU - Inzlicht, Michael

AU - Jaubert, Sara

AU - Kasanov, Dauren

AU - Khoddami, Mohammad Mohsen

AU - Kim, Taenyun

AU - Kiyokawa, Kiyoshi

AU - Kodapanakkal, Rabia I.

AU - Kosachenko, Alexandra

AU - Maedge, Kortney

AU - Mahaney, John H.

AU - Martinie, Marie-Amélie

AU - Mascheretti, Vitor N.

AU - Matsuda, Yoriko

AU - Mauduy, Maxime

AU - Mauny, Nicolas

AU - Metzen, Armand

AU - Moreno-Bella, Eva

AU - Moya, Miguel

AU - Nadarajah, Kévin

AU - Nejat, Pegah

AU - Norman, Elisabeth

AU - Okten, Irmak Olcaysoy

AU - Özdoğru, Asil A.

AU - Ozer, Ceyda

AU - Padial-Rojas, Elena

AU - Pavlov, Yuri G.

AU - Perusquia-Hernandez, Monica

AU - Proost, Dora

AU - Rabinovitch, Aleksandra

AU - Rohmer, Odile

AU - Selcuk, Emre

AU - Sénémeaud, Cécile

AU - Shani, Yaniv

AU - Shmeleva, Elena A.

AU - Simoens, Emmelie

AU - Smith, Kaitlin A.

AU - Somat, Alain

AU - Song, Hayeon

AU - Sonmez, Fatih

AU - Souchet, Lionel

AU - Taylor, John J.

AU - van Beest, Ilja

AU - van der Linden, Nicolas

AU - Verheyen, Steven

AU - Verschuere, Bruno

AU - Vezirian, Kevin

AU - Vieira, Luc

AU - Wiechert, Sera

AU - Willis, Guillermo B.

AU - Wollast, Robin

AU - Xia, Ji

AU - Yamada, Yuki

AU - Yoshimura, Naoto

AU - Priolo, Daniel

PY - 2024/2/5

Y1 - 2024/2/5

N2 - According to cognitive-dissonance theory, performing counterattitudinal behavior produces a state of dissonance that people are motivated to resolve, usually by changing their attitude to be in line with their behavior. One of the most popular experimental paradigms used to produce such attitude change is the induced-compliance paradigm. Despite its popularity, the replication crisis in social psychology and other fields, as well as methodological limitations associated with the paradigm, raise concerns about the robustness of classic studies in this literature. We therefore conducted a multilab constructive replication of the induced-compliance paradigm based on Croyle and Cooper (Experiment 1). In a total of 39 labs from 19 countries and 14 languages, participants (N = 4,898) were assigned to one of three conditions: writing a counterattitudinal essay under high choice, writing a counterattitudinal essay under low choice, or writing a neutral essay under high choice. The primary analyses failed to support the core hypothesis: No significant difference in attitude was observed after writing a counterattitudinal essay under high choice compared with low choice. However, we did observe a significant difference in attitude after writing a counterattitudinal essay compared with writing a neutral essay. Secondary analyses revealed the pattern of results to be robust to data exclusions, lab variability, and attitude assessment. Additional exploratory analyses were conducted to test predictions from cognitive-dissonancetheory. Overall, the results call into question whether the induced-compliance paradigm provides robust evidence for cognitive dissonance.

AB - According to cognitive-dissonance theory, performing counterattitudinal behavior produces a state of dissonance that people are motivated to resolve, usually by changing their attitude to be in line with their behavior. One of the most popular experimental paradigms used to produce such attitude change is the induced-compliance paradigm. Despite its popularity, the replication crisis in social psychology and other fields, as well as methodological limitations associated with the paradigm, raise concerns about the robustness of classic studies in this literature. We therefore conducted a multilab constructive replication of the induced-compliance paradigm based on Croyle and Cooper (Experiment 1). In a total of 39 labs from 19 countries and 14 languages, participants (N = 4,898) were assigned to one of three conditions: writing a counterattitudinal essay under high choice, writing a counterattitudinal essay under low choice, or writing a neutral essay under high choice. The primary analyses failed to support the core hypothesis: No significant difference in attitude was observed after writing a counterattitudinal essay under high choice compared with low choice. However, we did observe a significant difference in attitude after writing a counterattitudinal essay compared with writing a neutral essay. Secondary analyses revealed the pattern of results to be robust to data exclusions, lab variability, and attitude assessment. Additional exploratory analyses were conducted to test predictions from cognitive-dissonancetheory. Overall, the results call into question whether the induced-compliance paradigm provides robust evidence for cognitive dissonance.

KW - attitude change

KW - cognitive dissonance

KW - counterattitudinal essay

KW - induced compliance

KW - multilabs

KW - replication

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85184414990&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1177/25152459231213375

DO - 10.1177/25152459231213375

M3 - Article

SN - 2515-2459

VL - 7

SP - 1

EP - 26

JO - Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science

JF - Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science

IS - 1

ER -

A Multilab Replication of the Induced-Compliance Paradigm of Cognitive Dissonance

Abstract

Keywords

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this