A simple example would be when individuals have two tasks to complete and pick the more appealing of the two to do first. Postponing the second. Is there any theory to suggest that the simple act of passing on the second option make it "even less" appealing than it would be if it was the only task given
I donot have a psychoanalytic perspective, yet, just for the sake of brainstorming, I want to suggest that "rationalization" as an ego defense mechanism from the psychoanalytic model may have some similiarities with the phenomenon you describe. In rationalization, a person simply engages in a wishful and distorted reasoning in order to protect his/her ego. What you describe, seem to be that a person engages in a wishful thinking in order to perhaps foster his/her self image (or "ego" in general). What you describe, may be a kind of self-presentation strategy.
Thanks Cinar, actually I've found there is some literature in both cognitive psychology and marketing that discusses how alternative that have been rejected once are inordinately unfavored later on. Ie. When chosing A over B, that choice also increases the likelihood of selecting C over B (more so than if the choice between A and B was never given).
Interesting, and informative, I would also appreciate if you can share some references from the cognitive approach.
More specifically, the % of individuals selecting C over B is greater if they have already been given the opportunity to choose between A and B (full sample difference in this case, not dependent on actual choice - Rejection of B more influential across the sample than is its acceptance over A in an original choice, as far as later choices are concerned)
On the cognitive psychology side, one two-stage, three option study that is an interesting read is Egan's 2010 piece in Journal of Experimental Social Psychology. A work of my own with some related topical interest is Prioritizing and Monitoring Concurrent Project Work: Effects on Switching Behavior, forthcoming in POM
People need to believe that they made the right choice. They need to believe this more when they make a choice between two apparently equal things. So I agree that this is a product of rationalizing to eliminate cognitive dissonance.
If you accept memory and personality as a narrative we constantly tell ourselves and retell ourselves, this becomes more obvious - a person knows the end result, now he has to divine his deeper motives.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Correction