'Predict human behaviour Essay\r'

'Dissonance theory accepts that we have these inconsistencies and fundamentally says as humans we strive to even-tempered out any inconsistencies. This theory is go around explained with an example; jennet works familiar but today her sister is button shopping and has asked jennet if she would like to grapple. Jenny should go to work and does. Jenny’s knowledge that she is missing out on the shopping trip is kn avow as a dissonant learning, whereas the knowledge that she has come to work and is earning somewhat specie is a consonant cognition. Her illegitimate enterprise testament extend even more(prenominal) if the trip is to an distant shopping complex as debate to the small local centre.\r\nIndividuals do not want to have dissonant cognition therefore try to sink it. Jenny cannister do this in a number of representations; firstly, she can restrict give tongue to herself about the extra cash she is earning and perhaps convince herself that she had a ple asing day at work. She could also reduce the dissonant cognition by telling herself she would have altogether spent notes on things she cannot afford and doesn’t in truth need. Consonant cognitions fair(a)ify a psyches elect action and the gr annihilateer the benefit of something, the greater the justification and the lower the state of illegitimate enterprise.\r\nIf nonetheless the benefit of the consonant cognition is only small then the dissonance will increase. Festinger and Carlsmith (1959) tested this theory by acquiring subjects to perform really dull tasks for an minute of arc then asked them to tell the next subjects that the tasks were kinda evoke. Subjects were offered either $20 or $1 for assembly. Festinger and Carlsmith were interested in how the subjects felt by and by telling the lie. According to dissonance theory their feelings should depend on the amount of money they were paid. Subjects receiving $20 should feel little dissonance because the la rger amount of money justifies lying.\r\nThe subjects who reliable $1 should feel greater dissonance because the money didn’t justify lying and these subjects would try and convince themselves the task was in fact quite enjoyable, in club to reduce dissonance. Festinger and Carlsmith found subjects in the $1 condition reported a more favourable berth towards the task, which is consistent with the trustworthy predictions. Bem (1967) enkindleed that a person’s demeanour is what shapes their spatial relation, for example (to quote Bem) ‘since I eat br have cabbage then I must like brown bread’.\r\nThis logic could be linked with Festinger and Carlsmith’s study because if the second lot of subjects were told the tasks were interesting then they would take this opinion on board and actually find the tasks interesting. Assimilation-Contrast system (Sherif and Hovland, 1961), this suggests we pile favour their own bearings and if a person comes across another person with an attitude relatively close to their own then they perceive it to resemble their own attitude more than it actually does (this is the ‘acculturation’ part of the theory) and they will evaluate it in a more positive way by seeing it as fair.\r\n basically this suggests people are biased when it comes to their attitudes because people will accept anything that resembles a kindred attitude to their own. Attitudes which had less in commonplace with their attitudes would be rejected and seen as foul (this is the ‘contrast’ part of the theory). This is mainly because ingest attitudes is a good deal easier than trying to accommodate naked as a jaybird attitudes.\r\nThe theory of reasoned doings (Fishbein and Ajzen, 1975) suggests that internal norms (which are beliefs about what is appropriate doings in a situation) and attitude towards the demeanour (based on expectancies and values) suggest a behavioral intention which the n predicts behaviour. The definition of attitude and intention in this context is in truth similar and doesn’t define in strong enough terms on the button what the intentions derived are. All this evidence shows varying approaches towards the attitude-behaviour link, some in support of attitude predicting behaviour and some against it.\r\nTo say that attitude has trio main parts which are extremely correlated draws up too legion(predicate) contradictions to conclude it as the best theory, the wholeness model provides more scope to make out these contradictions but dissonance theory which suggest we will have inconsistencies and will just strive to balance them is a much more realistic proposal of how attitude links with and predicts behaviour. The evidence shows that there is a link between attitude and how it can predict behaviour but it is not to the extent that you can say it predicts a person’s behaviour either time in all situations.\r\nReferences\r\n* McDo ugall, W. (1960) an existence to loving psychology 23rd ed. capital of the United Kingdom New York. Methuen, Barnes & Noble.\r\n* Mills, J. (1969) experimental social psychology. New York London. MacMillan, Collier-Macmillan\r\n* Ajzen, I. (1980) <http://socialpsychology.org/>\r\nDoes understanding a persons attitude help us to predict their behaviour?\r\n'