Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2000 Jul;79(1):5-22.
doi: 10.1037//0022-3514.79.1.5.

The cognitive impact of past behavior: influences on beliefs, attitudes, and future behavioral decisions

D Albarracín  1 , R S Wyer Jr
Affiliations
Comparative Study

The cognitive impact of past behavior: influences on beliefs, attitudes, and future behavioral decisions

D Albarracín et al. J Pers Soc Psychol. 2000 Jul.

Abstract

To study the processes by which past behavior influences future behavior, participants were led to believe that without being aware of it, they had expressed either support for or opposition to the institution of comprehensive exams. Judgment and response time data suggested that participants' perceptions of their past behavior often influenced their decisions to repeat the behavior. This influence was partly the result of cognitive activity that influenced participants' cognitions about specific behavioral consequences and the attitude they based on these cognitions. More generally, however, feedback about past behavior had a direct effect on participants' attitudes and ultimate behavioral decisions that was independent of the outcome-specific cognitions. Results are discussed in terms of their implications for biased scanning of memory, dissonance reduction, self-perception, and the use of behavior as a heuristic.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
The influence of past behavior on cognitions and future behavioral performance.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Path analyses from Experiment 2. Panel A: Low distraction. Panel B: High distraction. *p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Path analyses from Experiment 3. Panel A: Low distraction. Panel B: High distraction. *p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Path analyses for meta-analysis of Experiments 2 and 3. Panel A: Low distraction. Panel B: High distraction. *p < .05. ***p < .001.
Figure 5
Figure 5
Path analyses from Experiment 4. Panel A: Low distraction. Panel B: High distraction. *p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Ajzen I, Fishbein M. Understanding attitudes and predicting social behavior. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall; 1980.
    1. Albarracin D. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of Illinois; 1997. Elaborative and nonelaborative processing of a behavior-related communication.
    1. Bargh JA. The automaticity of everyday life. In: Wyer RS, editor. Advances in social cognition. Vol. 10. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum; 1997. pp. 1–62.
    1. Bem DJ. An experimental analysis of self-persuasion. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology. 1965;1:199–218.
    1. Bem DJ. Self-perception: An alternative interpretation of cognitive dissonance phenomena. Psychological Review. 1967;74:183–200. - PubMed

Publication types