Page 55 - How_Children_Learn_To_Hate_Their_Parents

Behavior is Stronger When it is Chosen, not Coerced:
In an experiment conducted by Hobden and Olson (1994), and one that is ironically relevant to court-involved issues of custody, the experiment revolved around people making disparaging comments about lawyers. One group of individuals was asked to read disparaging jokes about lawyers into a tape recorder (for instance, “How do you know when a lawyer is lying? His lips are moving.”) The reading produced more negative attitudes about lawyers when the activity was chosen rather than coerced.
Once again we can see the inherent danger in allowing children to decide whether or not to see a parent for visitation, or even whether they should have a relationship with that parent. Giving them the choice, or making children believe that it is their choice brings the child one step closer to wanting to terminate the relationship altogether.
Cognitive dissonance theory focuses its attention on what induces people to act. This is very different from what reinforcement theory (or the notion of bribing a child to avoid visitation), which focuses on rewarding behavior after it already occurs.
Dissonance theory and the research that has been collected studying it has relevance to what happens after a decision is made. After a decision is made (i.e. “I never want to see my father again.”) people tend to upgrade the decision they make and downgrade the alternative (i.e. “I can have a good time with both Mom or Dad and love them both.”) Knox and Inkster (1968) showed that racetrack bettors reported improved confidence in their bets right after they placed their bets than those who were asked right before their bets. Younger (1977) demonstrated that
55