On the propositional nature of cognitive consistency: Dissonance changes explicit, but not implicit attitudes

By Bertram Gawronski, F. Strack. 2004

316 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Applied Psychology, Social Psychology, Sociology and Political Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/284baa867f329b4392666b5b3efa1ab6ff1970d6

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Applied Psychology

In Social Psychology

In Sociology and Political Science

Citations in the corpus

12. Formation, change, and contextualization of mental associations: determinants and principles of variations in implicit measures (2010, background): “Again, this assumption is consistent with several studies showing effects on explicit but not implicit mea~ sures (e.g., Gawronski & Strack, 2004; Gregg et al., 2006; Grumm et al., 2009).”
Cultural differences in responses to real-life and hypothetical trolley problems (2014, unknown): “…may have reported their judgments truthfully but, because judgments were elicited after actions, they may have tended to form judgments that were consistent with actions previously taken in order to avoid cognitive dissonance (Brehm, 1956; Gawronski & Strack, 2004; Stone & Cooper, 2001).”
When the method makes a difference: Antagonistic effects on “automatic evaluations” as a function of task characteristics of the measure (2009, background): “Moreover, research addressing change in automatic evaluations has investigated various mechanisms, including cognitive dissonance (e.g., Gawronski & Strack, 2004), attitude-related education programs (e.g., Rudman, Ashmore, & Gary, 2001), and extended training in negating evaluative responses…”
baCk To The fUTUre of DissonanCe Theory: CogniTive ConsisTenCy as a Core moTive (2012, background): “Second, the specification of the involved cognitive elements implies that these elements have to be understood as propositions about states of affairs that are regarded as true or false by the individual (Gawronski & Strack, 2004).”
Ten Frequently Asked Questions About Implicit Measures and Their Frequently Supposed, But Not Entirely Correct Answers (2009, background): “…implicit but not self-report measures (e.g., Gawronski & LeBel, 2008; Olson & Fazio, 2006), changes in self-report but not implicit measures (e.g., Gawronski & Strack, 2004; Gregg et al., 2006), corresponding changes in self-report and implicit measures (e.g., Gawronski & LeBel, 2008; Olson &…”
Getting Explicit About the Implicit (2012, background): “…are influenced by cognitive and motivational forces like social desirability and evaluation apprehension, implicit processes are far less subject to deliberative influences (for reviews, see Fazio & Olson, 2003; Gawronski & Strack, 2004; Greenwald & Banaji, 1995; Greenwald & Nosek, 2008).”
Unraveling respect in organization studies (2014, background): “Appraisal respect effects on self-esteem Appraisal respect influences explicit self-esteem because it is the cognitive esteem of which people are aware and therefore influenced by identity-relevant events (Gawronski and Bodenhausen, 2006; Gawronski and Strack, 2004; Grumm et al., 2009).”
Narcissistic Fragility: Rethinking Its Links to Explicit and Implicit Self-esteem (2010, background): “It has long been theorized that implicit attitudes are more robust than their explicit counterparts (Wilson, Lindsey, & Schooler, 2000 ) and some empirical evidence bears out this assertion (Gawronski & Strack, 2004 ).”
Changing explicit and implicit attitudes: The case of self-esteem (2009, background): “Changing Explicit and Implicit Attitudes 5 As implicit and explicit attitudes are influenced by different processes (Gawronski & Strack, 2004, Olson & Fazio, 2006, Rydell & McConnell, 2006), asymmetric attitude changes may occur, which in turn can lead to discrepancies between implicit and explicit…”
The propositional approach to associative learning as an alternative for association formation models (2009, background): “Whether a proposition is considered to be true depends on the extent to which it is consistent with other propositions believed to be true (e.g., Gawronski & Strack, 2004).”
Cognitive consistency and the formation of interpersonal attitudes: Cognitive balance affects the encoding of social information (2005, methodology): “The obtained inXuence of cognitive balance on implicitly assessed attitudes may appear to be in contrast with recent Wndings by Gawronski and Strack (2004), indicating that cognitive dissonance changes only explicitly, but not implicitly assessed attitudes. SpeciWcally, Gawronski and Strack argued t”
I Trust It, but I Don’t Know Why (2013, background): “…for changing explicit attitudes, such as providing information (e.g., telling the user the automation’s reliability) and the use of persuasive techniques, do not have significant effects on implicit attitudes (Gawronski & Bodenhausen, 2006; Gawronski & Strack, 2004; Rydell & McConnell, 2006).”