Controversy within a cooperative or competitive context and cognitive perspective-taking

Forty-five undergraduates discussed a moral issue with a confederate who had the same opinion (no controversy) or opposite opinion (controversy). Subjects in the controversy conditions discussed within either a cooperative or a competitive context. Subjects in the controversy conditions indicated more conceptual conflict or uncertainty, engaged in more information seeking behavior, and were more accurate in taking the cognitive perspective of the confederate than were subjects in the no-controversy condition. These results support Piaget's and Kohlberg's views of the role of controversy in perspective-taking and cognitive development and Berlyne's theory of conceptual conflict and epistemic curiosity. Subjects in the competitive-context conditions experienced more uncertainty, engaged in more information-seeking behavior, and were more accurate in cognitive perspective-taking than were subjects in the cooperative-context condition. Subjects in the competitive-context condition also experienced more cognitive dissonance, derogated the confederate and the confederate's position and arguments to a greater extent, and indicated greater closed-mindedness in responding to the confederate and the confederate's arguments than did subjects in the cooperative-context or the no-controversy conditions.