title: Thinking and caring about cognitive inconsistency: when and for whom does attitudinal ambivalence feel uncomfortable?
abstract: The relation between conflicting evaluations of attitude objects (potential ambivalence) and associated unpleasant feelings (felt ambivalence) was investigated. Participants indicated their potential and felt ambivalence about capital punishment (Studies 1 and 2) and abortion (Studies 1-3). The simultaneous accessibility (J. N. Bassili, 1996) of participants' potential ambivalence (i.e., how quickly and equally quickly conflicting evaluations came to mind) was measured using response latency (Studies 1-3) and manipulated by repeated expression (Study 3). The relation between potential ambivalence and felt ambivalence was strongest when potential ambivalence was high in simultaneous accessibility (Studies 1-3). This pattern was most pronounced for participants who were high in preference for consistency (Study 3; R. B. Cialdini, M. R. Trost, & T. J. Newsom, 1995). Similarities of ambivalence and cognitive dissonance constructs are discussed.
authors.affiliation: Department of Psychology, University of Windsor, Ontario, Canada. newby@uwindsor.ca
authors.forename: Ian R
authors.initials: IR
authors.lastname: Newby-Clark
authors.forename: Ian
authors.initials: I
authors.lastname: McGregor
authors.forename: Mark P
authors.initials: MP
authors.lastname: Zanna
mesh_terms: D000328:Adult; D000339:Affect; D001290:Attitude; D003071:Cognition; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D011930:Reaction Time