Page 215 - The Social Animal

Self-Justification 197

uals of the opposite sex, who they believed were applicants to the
dating service. They were then asked to rate the attractiveness of
these applicants, as well as how much they believed they would enjoy
a potential date with him or her—a possibility that was presented in
a realistic manner. The results of this study were remarkably similar
to Brehm’s findings about appliances: The more heavily committed
the students were to their current romantic partners, the more neg-
ative were their ratings of the attractiveness of alternative partners
presented in the study. In a subsequent experiment, Jeffry Simpson
18
and his colleagues also found that those in committed relationships
saw opposite-sex persons as less physically and sexually attractive
than did those who weren’t in committed relationships. In addition,
Simpson and his co-workers showed that this effect holds only for
“available others”; when presented with individuals who were some-
what older or who were of the same sex, people in committed rela-
tionships did not derogate their attractiveness. In short: no threat, no
dissonance; no dissonance, no derogation.
In sum, whether we are talking about appliances or romantic
partners, once a firm commitment has been made, people tend to
focus on the positive aspects of their choices and to downplay the at-
tractive qualities of the unchosen alternatives.

Some Historical Examples of the
Consequences of Decisions

Although some of the material discussed above is benign enough, it is
impossible to overstate the potential dangers posed by our susceptibil-
ity to these tendencies. When I mentioned that ignoring potential
danger to reduce dissonance could conceivably lead to a person’s death,
I meant that literally. Suppose a madman has taken over your country
and has decided to eradicate all members of your religious group. But
you don’t know that for sure. What you do know is that your country
is being occupied, that the leader of the occupation forces does not like
your religious group, and that occasionally members of your faith are
forced to move from their homes and are kept in detention camps.
What do you do? You could try to flee from your country; you could
try to pass as a member of a different religious group; or you could sit
tight and hope for the best. Each of these options is extremely