Rational processing or rationalization? The effect of disconfirming information on a stated religious belief.

Cognitive dissonance theory assumes that man is a rationalizing animal, actively defending himself by means of distortion and denial against information which contradicts deeply held beliefs. In contrast, recent critiques of dissonance theory by Bern and others picture man as a rational, if fallible, information processor. A study is reported in which adolescent females were given a chance to commit themselves publicly to a religious belief and were then faced with information which seemed to disconfirm that belief. Consistent with dissonance interpretations of earlier field studies, subjects who both expressed belief and accepted the veracity of the disconfirming information subsequently expressed a significant increase in intensity of belief. This reaction was not found among subjects who either had not expressed initial belief or had not accepted the veracity of the disconfirming information. Possible limitations on the generality of these results are emphasized.