Reports
Ambivalence and decisional conflict as a cause of psychological discomfort: Feeling tense before jumping off the fence

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2008.08.015Get rights and content

Abstract

It has long been assumed that people experience evaluative conflict or ambivalence as unpleasant. In three studies we provide direct evidence for the assumption that ambivalence is unpleasant, but only when one has to commit to one side of the issue. In those situations ambivalence will be related to outcome uncertainty and feelings of discomfort. We examined this prediction using both self-reports and physiological measures. In a first study we manipulated ambivalence and whether or not participants had to take a clear stand vis-a vis the attitudinal issue and choose a position for or against it. Results indicate ambivalence was only related to physiological arousal when a choice had to be made. Feeling ambivalent about an issue without the necessity to choose did not result in higher levels of arousal. A second study replicated and extended these findings by including a measure of subjective uncertainty about the decision. Results showed the same pattern as in Study 1, and indicate that the relation between ambivalence and arousal is mediated by uncertainty about decisional outcomes. In the third and final study these findings are corroborated using self-report measures; these indicated that ambivalence-induced discomfort is related to specific (negative) emotions.

Section snippets

Study 1

Our aim is to examine whether ambivalence is particularly stressful when an attitude relevant choice has to be made. In order to address this question, we experimentally manipulate ambivalence and assess participants’ Skin Conductance Level (SCL) as a measure of physiological arousal.

The attitude object was the potential introduction of a new labor law in The Netherlands, similar to the one that caused turmoil in France during the first months of 2006. This law would make it easier for

Study 2

In this study we aim to replicate and extend the findings of Study 1. In the present study, we also assess experienced uncertainty regarding the consequences of the choice. We expect that levels of uncertainty would show a pattern similar to that of the SCL increase in Study 1. It is also expected that uncertainty mediates the impact of the experimental manipulation on SCL.

Study 3

In this last study we orthogonally manipulate ambivalence and choice, concerning a new attitude object: the potential introduction of an ‘energy tax’. We expect discomfort to be most pronounced when ambivalence is high and a choice has to be made. To establish the valence of the ambivalence-induced arousal we found earlier, we now assess discomfort using self-report measures of affect.

General discussion

In research on attitudes it has long been assumed that ambivalence is unpleasant because people have a general preference for consistency. The current studies show that this is indeed the case, but particularly when the ambivalence can no longer remain non-committal and one has to choose between the two conflicting cognitions. When there is no need to choose, and one can hold on to the status quo, ambivalence is not more stressful than holding a univalent attitude. For example, if someone feels

References (22)

  • A.J. Elliot et al.

    On the motivational nature of cognitive dissonance: Dissonance as psychological discomfort

    Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

    (1994)
  • Cited by (129)

    • Consumer attitude toward nonconventional breeding

      2023, Developing Sustainable and Health-Promoting Cereals and Pseudocereals: Conventional and Molecular Breeding
    • Torn but balanced: Trait ambivalence is negatively related to confirmation

      2022, Personality and Individual Differences
      Citation Excerpt :

      Possibly ambivalence leads to more biased information processing when the ambivalent attitude towards the issue at hand translates into the metacognitive awareness of feeling conflicted (i.e., subjective ambivalence; van Harreveld et al., 2015). When this subjective experience of the ambivalent attitude is accompanied by negative affect, people become motivated to quickly resolve their ambivalent attitude (Van Harreveld, Rutjens, et al., 2009) – likely by engaging in biased information processing (Clark et al., 2008). The present work can serve as a jumping-off point for future research looking to directly explore why ambivalence has positive effects.

    • A Systematic Study of Ambivalence and Well-Being in Romantic Relationships

      2024, Social Psychological and Personality Science
    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text