Self-affirmation versus self-consistency: a comparison of two competing self-theories of dissonance phenomena

High or low self-esteem individuals participated in a role-playing paradigm in which a friend stood them up for a dinner date. The participants received either a good explanation from the friend for the missed date (sufficient justification) or a poor explanation (insufficient justification). As predicted by self-affirmation theory (Steele, 1988), but not self-consistency theory (Aronson, 1999), low-esteem participants derogated the friend more than high-esteem participants under both insufficient and sufficient justification. Also supporting self-affirmation theory, sufficient/low-esteem participants reported more offense for being stood-up than sufficient/high-esteem participants. Discussion centers on the role of self-esteem in dissonance processes and on the need for more research that focuses on dissonance/self-threats that result from the behavior of other(s) rather than one’s own behavior.