| Abstract: | This paper evaluates the critical review of the dissonance literature by Chapanis and Chapanis (1964) and concludes that these authors, for the most part, do not accomplish what they purport to, i.e, the presentation of alternative explanations of the findings they deal with. The "methodological inadequacies" discussed by the Chapanises are viewed as acceptable procedures and necessary components of the inductive process. An alternative explanation for the popularity of dissonance theory is offered and the current status of the model is reconsidered. (20 ref.) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved) |
