To present the topic of the Clinton Crisis to the class, we used a recent cartoon from Newsweek that illustrated cognitive dissonance and the balance theory. In-group bias, biased processing, and motivated reasoning can also be applied to our topic. Finally, Tall Poppy Theory is applicable to the Clinton Crisis because of the nature of his success and ability to fall after a scandal such as the current Lewinsky affair. Other principles were discussed during class and we will describe how our main four and the related principles were applied during class discussion.

    The discussion began when we asked what our classmates’ attitudes are towards Clinton now as opposed to what they were before the scandal. We asked if they felt that any change in their attitudes could be attributed to cognitive dissonance. Festinger’s theory of cognitive dissonance states that "there is a tendency for individuals to seek consistency among their cognitions. When there is an inconsistency between attitudes or behaviors, something must change to eliminate the dissonance" (Festinger 1975). This was portrayed in our comic that asked, "Can’t we just impeach him from the waist down?" This statement demonstrates a desire to separate Clinton into "Clinton as our leader," (waist up), and "Clinton as a sexual being," (the waist down). These two roles tend to conflict and cause cognitive dissonance which we resolve by readjusting our attitudes. We discussed in class how this attitude readjustment is reflected in his increased popularity.

    This introduced the topic of Hillary’s attitudes toward the alleged affair and her faithful support for her husband. A classmate brought up how not only they were suprised about the president’s increased popularity, but they were suprised how Hillary has kept under control and continues to show love and support for her husband. This is reflected in the theories of motivated reasoning and biased processing. Motivated reasoning, according to Houston and Fazio, are the reasons we use to control internal conflicts so that the conclusions we come up with are justifiable (Fazio 1989). Fazio also stated that one of the main characteristics that controls motivated reasoning is in interest in our own personal goals. Finding the outcome of the problem is a strong motivator to our reasoning. For Hillary, if her husband is impeached, then she is also out of the White House. She has been a prominent figure in politics during her husband’s presidency, so she has her own political interests to look out for, as well as her image in general. An important concept in biased processing is the concept of truth bias. This concept is illustrated by Stiff, Kim, and Ramesh. The idea of this theory is that the closer and more intimate we are, the more we expect to be told the truth. Hillary demonstrates this in her unconditional support for her husband and her statements of his innocence. The rest of the nation does not have this close intimate relationship with him, so it is not expected that they would believe in his innocence like a long time companion would.

    Then, when a classmate discussed conservative and liberal views, she was essentially identifying the in-group bias held by Democrats and Republicans. In-group bias occurs when a person identifies with a particular group and competes against a group which with they do not identify. Members of that out-group appear to all be alike and represent similar values. The classmates that said they never cared for Clinton and "knew he was like this (promiscuous)" are possibly demonstrating a bias that could be held by conservative individuals. Their attributions are motivated by which group they identify with, and the values they see the out-group possessing. Solomon Asch performed a classic study that illustrated the power of conformity caused by in-group pressure as opposed to out-group pressure (Acsh 1955). Also, out-group members are evaluated less favorably than in-group members (Meindl and Lerner 1984).

    Next, a classmate made the remark, "...how could Clinton be so dumb?" This is an implication of a principle discussed in Chapter 3 of our text; self-handicapping. It often seems that people are doing things that clearly lead themselves to defeat and destruction. However, Baumeister explains that counterproductive strategies are adopted following misjudgments about the self and the world. We discussed how a journalist from the Wall Street Journal stated that Clinton has always been involved in high risk activities, like running for President, which become familiar behaviors for him. This journalist went on to hypothesize that people act the way they act because of an unconscious need to recreate the familiar. Another possible explanation for Clinton’s high risk behavior could be explained by Clinton’s position of power and control and the Control Hypothesis which states that "the greater the perceived controllability of a negative event, the greater the tendency for people to believe that their own chances are less than average..."(Weinstein, 1980). Harris supports this hypothisis with strong evidence of an association between perceived controllability and optimistic bias of negative events (Harris, 1996).

    Many class members had conflicting feelings about the application of Tall Poppy to the scandal. Although, evidenced by the press that there is often more coverage of this topic than other very important affairs, the class believed that to be a result of the reporters and not of their own interests. In fact, this corresponds with many other American views around the country as show by Gallop Polls in that states Americans are no longer interested in the topic. However, another class member pointed out that this particular view overlooked the media as a business. He claimed that the press was only reporting what the public wanted to hear and see. Someone else commented that the press does in deed have tracking measures that help them evaluate public interest. If these ratings had been low, then the media would not have continued to push coverage of the scandal. Reponding to our question as to how truthful Americans are being in this poll, students replied that it made sense to them since it confirmed their own beliefs and biases. Yet, when urged by the discussion group to consider how often the group had discussed this topic with friends, teachers, classmates, and others, the group replied it had been a central point of focus since the story began.

    The group also pointed out that although almost everyone reports to not care about the scandal, everyone has an opinion as to the presidents’ innocence or guilt. A student interjected here that he did not belief this was the case for himself, since he waded both sides of the issues and felt trained well enough by Miami and by life to cipher the information in the media in to truth and fiction. However, it is perhaps unrealistic, given the many other social phenomena at work and the influence the media has been shown to posses, to belief all peoples would react in this matter.

    Feather (1989) reported that in a study in a South Australian high school, students were reported to feel more pleased when a high achiever fell than an average achiever. However, students also reported feeling more pleased and friendly towards an achiever who fell from a high achievement position to an average achievement position than to a bottom achievement position. These attitudes closely resembled the attitudes of the class. Although, the first premise may be debated, the class and a majority of Americans don't wish to see Clinton fall to the bottom (resignation or impeachment). The polls have also shown Clinton’s popularity has soared, perhaps this is indicative of people feeling more friendly towards him. One possible explanation for the increased friendliness is the idea that because he (potentially) messed up makes him more ordinary and more like everyone else. This particular attitude was indeed evidenced by one student who claimed he didn’t think that the president, despite his highly visible role in society, should be considered any more of a human or held to any higher standards than the average man.

    The underlying issue here is the concept of deception. Regardless of Clinton’s innocence or guilt, someone is lying. This led us to a discussion of the media’s influence in deciding what we believe. Many thought that they recognized the lack of truth in the media. The other question at hand was how people viewed the severity of Clinton’s potential lie. The class believed that since he is a politician, people expected him to lie. In fact, one student expressed that he can’t imagine Clinton reaching the presidency without lying. This perhaps evidences many different issues currently being examined in the field of deception. For instance, those who receive lies often view it as a much more negative experience than those who tell them (Bok, 1977). This effect, however, is mediated by the recently explored variable of closeness of relationship: the closer the relationship, the more devastating the lie. Perhaps, this variable helps explain why the class is not overly upset with the potential lie. It also led us into a discussion of how Hillary and Chelsea view Clinton as a husband and a father while dealing with this issue. The class did believe that if they were more involved in the situation as a daughter or as a wife, that they would be much more likely to be upset by the potential lie.

    The breadth of psychological principles that can be applied to the current White House Crisis are ubiquitous. However, the target of our classroom discussion continued to return to the attitudes and cognitive dissonance that individuals felt. We feel the discussion was energetic and informative. Personal views on the issue did not dominate nor did they create tension during the discussion.

References

    Asch, S.E. (1955). Opinions and Social Pressures. Scientific American, 139, 31-35.

    Bok, S. (1977). Lying: Moral Choice in Public and Private Life. New York Vintage Books.

    Feathers, N.T. (1989). Attitudes Towards the High Achiever: The Fall of the Tall Poppy. Australian Journal of Psychology, 41, 239-267.

    Festinger, L. (1975). A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

    Houston, D.A., & Fazio, R.H. (1989). Biased Processing as a Function of Attitude Accessibility: Making Objective Judgments Subjectivity. Social Cognition, 7(1), 51-66.

    Meidl, J.R., & Lerner, M.J. (1984). Exacerbation of Extreme Responses to an Out-group. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 47, 71-84.

    Newsweek February 2, 1998. Pg. 17.

    Stiff, J. B., Kim, H.J., & Ramesh, C. N. (1992). Truth Biases and Aroused Suspicion in Relational Deception. Communication Research, 19, 326-345.

    Weinstein, N.D. (1980). Unrealistic Optimism about Future Life Events. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39, 806-820.