I think they knew it not only secretly, but overtly: - Both people who found it mildly tedious and horribly mind numbing were happy to say it was fun for $20. - Only people who found it less tedious acceded to say it was fun for $1. - People who found it horribly boring... just turned down the offer to lie for $1. That's the filtering point, the ability to say "I found it so boring that I WILL NOT lie for $1".
dzieki wlasnie pomogles mi napisac wypracowanie, nawet nie wiesz ile szukalam jakichs krytycyzmow tego eksperymentu, na wszystkich stronach pisza tylko dlaczego festinger jest zajebisty ale nikt nie opisze ci metodologii i jej bledow
oh i got it now. the people that got paid less, lied to THEMSELVES at the end that they actually liked it, where in reality they didnt but were now to ashamed they lied for such a small amount of money. Its like the saying: its easy to fool one than to convince him that he was being fooled
@@ab1577 She looked about 20 and this experiment was done in 1959 so she is about 82 give or take a few years. Still in love? I guess it has been a year since you commented...
You know, I was just thinking that! I think it has something to do with the speech patterns of that time period, everyone sounds like they're lying all the time =P (or they are actually actors)
"Smart guys" like you often miss social cues, and that's ok. The "dollar liar" had, "I'm uncomfortable with this thought" all over her face. That's why they picked her because it was unusually apparent... to most of us. Also, your theory is based on assumptions you're making and the illogical thought that they could "know what the subjects were thinking". Which is impossible.
Do you think they secretly knew who did and didn't enjoy it? Of course not. There were multiple subjects and randomized money prizes for the purpose of eliminating what's called a "variable" in scientific theory. The people who lied had good reason to lie if they got 20 bucks. The people who got a dollar DIDN'T have a "good enough reason" to lie, so their mind had to change for them to justify doing it. The residual effect could be seen when they brought them back in to interview them.
You are assuming (and it looks like the experimenters did too) that all people felt the same, and then lied equally well, and the same amount. I postulate that they did not, that there were people who enjoyed the experiment less, and those who enjoyed it more, being only the latter who acceded to "lie" for $1... except it was not really a lie. Those who would have to actually lie, when offered $1, just said NO.
So, you pre-screen people based on whether they will be ready to say it was fun, aaaaand... then you deduce those who only got $1 were "obviously" under the effect of some "cognitive dissonance"? How about they didn't find it so boring in the first place, and THAT is why they agreed to "lie" for just $1?
Tbh The girl just seems like she doesn't wanna break it to him. She's the type that would go out with someone just so he wouldn't feel bad.
I think they knew it not only secretly, but overtly:
- Both people who found it mildly tedious and horribly mind numbing were happy to say it was fun for $20.
- Only people who found it less tedious acceded to say it was fun for $1.
- People who found it horribly boring... just turned down the offer to lie for $1.
That's the filtering point, the ability to say "I found it so boring that I WILL NOT lie for $1".
dzieki wlasnie pomogles mi napisac wypracowanie, nawet nie wiesz ile szukalam jakichs krytycyzmow tego eksperymentu, na wszystkich stronach pisza tylko dlaczego festinger jest zajebisty ale nikt nie opisze ci metodologii i jej bledow
oh i got it now. the people that got paid less, lied to THEMSELVES at the end that they actually liked it, where in reality they didnt but were now to ashamed they lied for such a small amount of money.
Its like the saying: its easy to fool one than to convince him that he was being fooled
the first girls voice is so angelic *__* so...beautiful
I'm in love with her. I wander if she's still alive
@@ab1577 She looked about 20 and this experiment was done in 1959 so she is about 82 give or take a few years. Still in love? I guess it has been a year since you commented...
@@Noahitis I was probably high when I wrote this comment.
@@ab1577 hahaha it was pretty funny though
did vsauce army get this far?
for ya ' ll simpletons out there
let me break it down for you
cognitive dissonance = coping
the end and thank you very much
LEON FESTINGER LOOKS LIKE OBAMA WITH GLASSE
Some of us would just find it fun to lie about something so inconsequential lol it’s like prank
Why do they act when they could've given us willing and real examples?
You know, I was just thinking that! I think it has something to do with the speech patterns of that time period, everyone sounds like they're lying all the time =P (or they are actually actors)
Interesting idea, I guess we could watch other actual interviews to see :)
FOR SCIENCE!
"Smart guys" like you often miss social cues, and that's ok. The "dollar liar" had, "I'm uncomfortable with this thought" all over her face. That's why they picked her because it was unusually apparent... to most of us. Also, your theory is based on assumptions you're making and the illogical thought that they could "know what the subjects were thinking". Which is impossible.
Do you think they secretly knew who did and didn't enjoy it? Of course not. There were multiple subjects and randomized money prizes for the purpose of eliminating what's called a "variable" in scientific theory. The people who lied had good reason to lie if they got 20 bucks. The people who got a dollar DIDN'T have a "good enough reason" to lie, so their mind had to change for them to justify doing it. The residual effect could be seen when they brought them back in to interview them.
What year is this
You are assuming (and it looks like the experimenters did too) that all people felt the same, and then lied equally well, and the same amount.
I postulate that they did not, that there were people who enjoyed the experiment less, and those who enjoyed it more, being only the latter who acceded to "lie" for $1... except it was not really a lie. Those who would have to actually lie, when offered $1, just said NO.
Vsaaauuuce
So, you pre-screen people based on whether they will be ready to say it was fun, aaaaand... then you deduce those who only got $1 were "obviously" under the effect of some "cognitive dissonance"?
How about they didn't find it so boring in the first place, and THAT is why they agreed to "lie" for just $1?
LOL. yes
They all seem like really bad actors XD
Are you still listening Republican's