I am a very anxiety prone person. This is something that I
like to avoid at all costs, like most individuals. I have come to realize that
sometimes I resort to changing my attitude, or the way I think about something
based on the anxiety I feel. According to Leon Festinger (1957) this is in line
with his Cognitive Dissonance Theory.
In essence, this theory states that when our attitudes are not inline with our
behaviors individuals tend to, or are motivated, to reduce this tension or
anxiety (Festinger, 1957). I can remember specifically, this one time I had
agreed or decided to go black Friday shopping with my sister (something I would
never do because I do not really enjoy shopping). Being the naive individual
that I can be, I thought we would go around nine or ten in the morning, since
we were both people who appreciated sleeping in (my sister more that myself,
thus leading me to my initial hypothesis of us leaving later in the morning).
After sleeping for a couple of hours, my older sister come in at four in the
morning and said we were going shopping. I was BEYOND pissed off, having only
gone to bed a coupe of hours before she came in my room and told me we were
about to leave. After hours of shopping, and NOTHING to show for I might add
(other than a belly full of free coffee and ONE reusable shopping bag), we
arrived back at our house. Once we arrived home, our parents greeted us and
asked how shopping went. Despite standing in a line for hours in the bitter
cold and being too far back in the line to get what we wanted (because they
sold out right as it was our turn), I still promptly responded with, “It wasn’t
that bad! I actually kind of liked going out for black Friday.” I instinctively
stated this without thinking.
Now that I think back to this incident I do not remember if
I did actually had a good time or if I was succumbing to the insufficient justification
perspective within cognitive
dissonance theory (Festinger, 1957). This theory stating that, an individual will freely engage
in a behavior that is not inline with their attitude without receiving a large
reward (Festinger, 1957). Specifically for me, because ONE free reusable tote
bag and a free SMALL cup of crappy coffee wasn’t enough to justify my behavior
of enjoying black Friday shopping, I had to adjust my attitude and thus I
decided that I did not mind shopping and that going out on black Friday was not
that bad – because otherwise I would feel stupid and unhappy about wasting my
time shopping on black Friday (after only receiving one reusable tote bag and
small cup or crappy coffee).
I have never really though of myself as a gullible or naïve
individual. I have trusted that I make rational decisions that are independent
of my emotion or other factors and solely rely on the facts of the argument.
However, after learning about the two routs to persuasion I learned, that in a
way, my previously held notion might not be as true as I would like to think.
After honestly thinking about myself I have come to learn that I tend to take
the peripheral route to the
persuasion (Petty & Cacioppo, 1986). That is, when it comes to
listening and making judgments or decisions based upon communication and or
interactions, I tent to rely on superficial cues (Petty & Cacioppo, 1986). I do not take the peripheral route with reference to persuasion all of the
time, but I especially did when I was younger. I thought that if you sounded
like you knew what you were talking about then I should believe you. However, I
sadly found out this may not be the case. For example, when I was younger I
always listened to my older sister’s friends. I thought, “hey, these girls are
older, they are in high school, they have to know what they are talking about.”
I was completely WRONG. FALSE. I was persuaded to exchange or give my older
sister and her friends my twenty dollars for their five dollars because, as
they explained, “a five is bigger than a two.” Despite the notion that I knew
twenty was bigger than five, I had to believe my sister and he friends because
they were older and knew more than I did. They even held out their hands to
reiterate that five was in fact larger than two. I could not dispute facts like
that.
My acquiescence did not end with my sister or sadly to admit
with me being a young child. I was even persuaded to buy certain items from an infomercial
once (I will decline to say at what age), because I was so convinced by the
commercial. I sadly, only relied on superficial cues and saw that it worked on
television and thought that it would without a doubt work for me as well. Which
was not the case.
After coming to terms with this notion, that I take a peripheral route to persuasion,
I have thus started to think more critically about what information convinces
me in hopes of soon becoming an individual that takes the central route to persuasion (Petty & Cacioppo, 1986). In
other words, I hope to become an individual that makes decisions based on facts
and the strength of an argument while thinking critically (Petty &
Cacioppo, 1986). I hope to make decisions based on the fact and not just based
on superficial attributes in the future.
(n = 471)
I refuse to get tricked out of my money again like these
children were tricked out of their candy.
I decided to be a different person for a day.
That is, I chose to accomplish my daily activities or tasks in a ‘non-normal
way’ with respect to my normal way of acting or behaving. Specifically, as a high self-monitor I am very
concerned with what others think and how they perceive me (Snyder, 1987). In
line with this notion and the fact that I grew up with two sisters, I am very
conscious of asking permission for everything I do – I try to appease others
more than myself in addition to being VERY indecisive. With this notion in mind
I decided to be a different person for a day with the main goal of doing
whatever I wanted without asking permission (i.e., making decisions based on my
own happiness) as well as being decisive. I generally tend to be overly conscious
about gaining others approval before I complete any task. To this point, I have
even had many friends tell me to STOP asking for permission for everything,
it’s unnecessary and they ask me to not always state ‘I don’t care’; however,
in my mind asking permission is a behavior that I see as being polite – I
rather see others happy, especially if it deals with something that isn’t
particular important to me or is not part of my self-schema (Markus, 1977). With all these ideas or notions taken into account, I thus
chose to be more decisive and to not ask for permission in my task of becoming
or acting like a different person for a day.
I went throughout my day completing
or doing anything I wanted without asking the permission of others. My day of
being a different person started when I first woke up (i.e., with breakfast). I
heard my roommate in the kitchen so I got out of bed and opened my door, went
to the stove and just had some of the eggs she had been making (without
permission). To this ‘sharing’ of breakfast I was met with a look of shock and
misunderstanding by my roommate followed by an approving nonverbal behavior, a head nod, at first made with
hesitation (Darwin, 1872). I subsequently went through my day doing things
without asking for permission. I took food off of my friends plate at lunch
because I wanted to taste it – after choosing where we were going to eat
(without debate), I took a soda out of my friends frig because I was thirsty, I
changed they way I interacted/texted with my friends, acting in a more decisive
manner (I didn’t leave things open to interpretation, I made a decision and it
was what I wanted without permission or debate). I even went as far as to just walk
inside a friend of a friend’s apartment (whom I had never met) to use the
restroom – without permission- while we were all standing outside talking
before going to dinner. Nobody seemed phased at the specific act; they were
more surprised that I didn’t ask for permission like I normally do. The next
day when I asked if they thought it was weird that I didn’t ask permission, my
friends just responded with, “yes, because it’s you, but you had to go to the
bathroom.”
Doing this all day was difficult to
say the least. I have learned in class that I am a people pleaser. I rather see
others happy instead of myself, because I don’t like to be the center of
attention for fear of disappointing others. I rather be a bystander and go
along with my friends instead of leading them. Changing this part of myself
even for 24 hours was very difficult, I had to keep reminding myself that I
needed to stay strong and follow through with being decisive and non-appeasing
for a day.
The reactions I got were very similar to that of my roommate
with respect to breakfast. My actions were met with shock initially, followed
by smiles and numerous questions asking about what had changed that caused me
to become firmer in the convictions of my actions. I had to just tell them that
I was having a super confident day – for fear of spilling the secret that it
was ALL a social experiment. When I saw the opportunity to do something without
permission or make a decision I was initially scared. I had a knot in my
stomach and felt like the social
spotlight was on full blast (Gilovich, Medvec, & Savitsky, 2000). Doing my best to
put my fear behind me, I completed the task while still shaking from nerves. Upon
completion of my ‘deviant’ behavior (deviant for me) I felt at ease again – my
nerves had subsided. However, as the day progressed the anxiety and fear seemed
to fade away, and it became easier to complete the task at hand. Part of this
was due to, I think, the facial
feedback hypothesis, which states that changes in facial expression
can, additionally, lead to changes in emotion (Laird, 1974). I went through the
day telling myself to smile and hold positive facial expressions while changing
my behavior which in turn helped change my nervous emotions I initially held
toward not asking for permission and being decisive.
From this experience, I learned a
lot about myself. I learned that I have a public
self-consciousness (Buss, 1980; Fenigstein, Scheier & Buss 1975). I
tend to think of myself in terms of how others perceive me and as such, I want
them to perceive me as somebody who not only has shared interests, but who also
is willing to sacrifice their own happiness in order to make them and others
happy. Through this process I have learned the true motives for my behavior. I
used to try to conform to
others because I thought it was what made them happy (Milgram, 1963). Contrary
to this initial thought, I found that my friends would rather I stand-up for
myself and show others that I care and can be decisive rather than just behave
in ways that are consistent with everyone else. I only disliked this change in
my behavior because it was inconsistent with my normal self (i.e., it make me
uncomfortable at first). However, after receiving positive feedback, following
the initial surprise reaction of my friends I realized that this change in
behavior might not be so bad after all.
I would consider making long-term changes to this behavior or trait. I
don’t think it will be an immediate change, but a gradual change is something
that I would very much embrace and strive toward.
What I learned about my self-presentation, in line with
its definition, is that I do like and want others to like me (Schlenker,
2003). However, I originally
thought that others (i.e., my friends and those I am close with) would rather
me conform to them rather
that I stand up for myself, be decisive, and not have to ask for permission for
everything I do (Milgram, 1963). Through being a different person for a day, I
learned that rather than being an ‘indecisive pushover’, for a lack of better
words, others would rather I do things for myself and not be so worried about
what they and others think. I believe this attribute within myself is something
that has been relatively stable up until this point – because I hope to change
it for the future. I think this notion, in turn, says a lot about my self-concept (Markus, 1977). Markus
(1977) asserted that our self-concept
is basically the notion that we form beliefs about our attributes through past
experiences, memories, and the interactions we have with others. Specifically,
for me, I think having grown up with two VERY outgoing, social, stubborn, and
overbearing siblings I learned that it was easiest and best to go with what
others want rather than making it more difficult by brining up my own wants –
especially when the matter was not very important to me. Moreover, I think that
I have been instilled with manners and respect towards others from my family
growing up to the point it still has a hold on my behavior as an adult, thus
playing an important part in forming my self-concept
(Markus, 1977). Being a different person for a day has changed the way I look
at myself for the better. I hope to change and be more like this ‘different’
person I portrayed for those 24 hours.
(n=1,406)
Buss, A. H. (1980). Self-consciousness
and social anxiety. San Francisco: Freeman.
Darwin,
C. The expression of the emotions in man
and animals. London: John Murray.
Fenigstein,
A., Scheier, M.F., & Buss, A. H. (1975). Public and private
self-consciousness: Assessment and theory. Journal
of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 43, 522-527.
Gilovich,
T., Medvec, V. H., & Savitsky, K. (2000). The spotlight effect in social
judgment: An egocentric bias in estimates of the salience of one’s own actions
and appearance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78, 211-222.
Laird,
J.D. (1974). Self-attribution of emotion: The effects of expressive behavior on
the quality of emotional appearance. Journal
of Personality and Social Psychology, 29, 475-486.
Markus,
H. (1977). Self-schemata and processing information about the self. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 35, 63-78.
Milgram,
S. (1963). Behavioral study of obedience. Journal
of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 67, 371-378.
Schlenker,
B. R. (2003). Self-presentation. In M.R. Leary & J. P. Tangney (Eds.), Handbook of self and identity (pp.492-518).
New York: Guilford.
Snyder,
M. (1987). The self-monitoring of expressive behavior. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 30, 526-537.
Today I took the Implicit Association
Test, or the IAT. For those of you who are not familiar with this test, it is
your lucky day – because I will explain it to you in terms even your
grandmother or older relative can understand! Greenwald and Banaji (1995) are
credited with developing the Implicit
Association Test. The IAT basically has to do with the notion that
memories or ideas that are unconscious to us (i.e., not readily
excisable/available to our conscious) may have a profound effect on our
actions, attitudes, behaviors or even associations (Greenwald & Banaji,
1995). The IAT is a computer-based measure that requires participants to
rapidly categorize words or pictures into one of two concepts, such that easier
pairings (i.e., faster responses) are seen as being more strongly associated in
memory (or the unconscious) than more difficult parings (i.e., slower
responses). Additionally, due to the notion that the IAT requires participants
to make many rapid judgments, it follows that IAT scores may also reflect attitudes,
which people may be unwilling to reveal publicly (Greenwald, McGhee &
Schwartz, 1998). This all boils down to the simple idea that the IAT is a
computer-based test that assesses the extent to which the unconscious has an
effect on rapid associations individuals make.
I took both the Gender-Science IAT and the Gender-Career IAT. I got
different results for each test. For the gender-science test, my data suggested
a slight association of Male with Science and Female with Liberal Arts compared
to Female with Science and Male with Liberal Arts. My results for this specific
test did not surprise me too much because I knew there was a bias within the
sciences and liberal arts with respect to gender (one that I am exposed to
within society on a daily basis). However, because I go to Southwestern and see
many individuals (both Male and Female) within both domains, it makes sense to
me that I only hold a slight bias. In contrast, my results for the
Gender-Career IAT showed that I hold a strong association of Male with Career
and Female with Family compared to Female with Career and Male with Family. This
surprised me because growing up I always had a nanny or babysitter because my
parents both worked all day. Growing up with both parents working, I thought,
might contribute to a weaker association for the gender-career test, however I
guess the strong association within society or some other factor led me to hold
different associations for the Gender-Career IAT.
I think the IAT shows individuals
“true” attitudes. That is, the test shows the attitudes that individuals
subconsciously hold as a result of societal and other environmental influences.
For example, I thought I would hold weaker gender-career association, because I
grew up with both parents working. However, having many friends whose mothers
did not work could have played a major factor in developing this unconscious association.
Upon completion of this test, I did start to think about stereotypes and
prejudice differently than I had before. I previously thought that if you were
aware of how reality can diverge from stereotypical associations then this idea
would appear when taking the IAT. Contrary to my expectations, it did not. Even
as somebody who is aware that working and family can be equally associated with
male or female, subconsciously this was not evident on the IAT test – society
may have a bigger socializing factor than I originally thought.
glozell1 (2008, June, 8). My Push up Bra will help me keep my man. Retrieved on March 5, 2013 from, http://youtu.be/gtkU2ch0sRI. Greenwald, A. G., & Banaji, M. R. (1995). Implicit social cognition: Attitudes, self-esteem, and stereotypes.Psychological Review, 102, 4-27. Greenwald, A. G., McGhee, D. E., & Schwartz, J. K. L.
(1998). Measuring individual differences in implicit cognition: The Implicit
Association Test.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 1464-1480.
Nosek, B. A., Greenwald, A. G.,
& Banaji, M. R. (2005). Understanding and using the Implicit Association
Test: II. Method variables and construct validity. Personality and Social
Psychology Bulletin, 31, 166–180.
