Drinking Age Controversy: Public Opinion

This assignment presents a series of questions related to the drinking age controversy. It provides frequency and percentage distributions for respondents' opinions on various statements about the legal drinking age. The data includes responses from 114 individuals, with options ranging from 'Strongly Disagree' to 'Strongly Agree'. The results show varying levels of agreement or disagreement among respondents on statements such as raising the drinking age reducing drug and alcohol abuse, and examining the legal drinking age by politicians, scientists, and the general public.

SPSS LAB REPORT

ABSTRACT
Cognitive dissonance theory is referred as tendency for individuals for seeking
consistency between different beliefs and opinions. This study will help in process of decision
making and on basis of selective exposure of information. The participants were recruited from
Australian university from 1st year psychology with accomplished from course credit. The
outcome has been evaluated with statistical tool SPSS on responses of situation. It has not
considered various factors which are creating impact on behaviour such as chemical imbalances
and biological structure. This would directly lead to human behaviour with various people for
accounting each individual in separate aspect.

TABLE OF CONTENTS
ABSTRACT.....................................................................................................................................2
Introduction.................................................................................................................................4
Literature review.........................................................................................................................4
Justification of study...................................................................................................................5
Hypotheses Statement.................................................................................................................5
METHOD 300.................................................................................................................................5
Participants..................................................................................................................................5
.....................................................................................................................................................6
Design.........................................................................................................................................6
Materials......................................................................................................................................6
Procedure....................................................................................................................................7
RESULTS........................................................................................................................................8
DISCUSSION................................................................................................................................17
REFERENCES..............................................................................................................................19
APPENDICES...............................................................................................................................20

Topic: To assist theory of cognitive dissonance with context of attitude towards legal
drinking age.
Introduction
Cognitive dissonance is replicated as situation which consist of conflicting attitude,
behaviour along with different belief. Generally, it produces feeling of discomfort which leads to
changes in attitude, behaviour and beliefs for decreasing level of discomfort and to restore
balance as well. For instance, when people drinks (behaviour) and they know that it causes
various disease (cognition). Then they are referred in cognitive dissonance state (van der Kolk &
Kaufmann, 2018).
Literature review
According to Festinger's (1957), theory of cognitive dissonance has recommended that
presence of inner drive for holding behaviour and attitude of all on basis of harmony and to
ignore dissonance. It is replicated as cognitive consistency's principle as if there is absence of
consistency among attitude and behaviour then there is requirement of alteration to substitute
dissonance. However Rabbie, Brehm & Cohen (1959), changing beliefs and attitude is more
consistent on basis of action and conflicts.
As per views of Hinojosa & et.al. (2017), this cognitive approach helps in depicting
picture to observe inward and to extract that how brain will interpret stimuli. It would be
highlighting impact of cognition on behaviour with its significance to people for understanding
the way of brain operations. This dissonance is beneficial for those who doesn't wants to be
faithful to their brain and to alter behaviour for better aspect. Thus, it directly highlights the
thought process of people. On the contrary, according to Harmon-Jones, Harmon-Jones & Levy
(2015), significant factor of human behaviour are dismisses as people who believe in this
approach that each aspect is boiled down to perform one thing that is process of cognitive. In
simple words, it doesn't consider factors which impact behaviours like individual experience,
genes, chemical imbalances and biological structure. It could lead to generalizing behaviours of
human which does not suit with various people who accounts every individual in different
aspect. So, it defeats people with unique behaviour and thought process as compared to normal
due to single or more listed factor.
According to Chang, Solomon & Westerfield (2016), it is fully based on various
controlled experiments with application of scientific methods. As different people has pointed

some experiments which might be not valid as they look as with observation of controlled
environment, they get responses which are closely associated to stimuli which is exposed to
subject. However, they did not get observation about subject with context of real world where
they are fully exposed to various stimuli for presence of reaction on basis of combined
information.
Justification of study
This study related to cognitive dissonance helps in providing implication with alterations
in someone's attitude for creating dissonance on basis of hope with desired outcome. This study
will help in process of decision making and on basis of selective exposure of information.
Hypotheses Statement
This study is designed for testing theory of cognitive dissonance for asking participants
for supporting to raise drinking age by 21 or participants who does not support to increasing
legal drinking age by 21.
METHOD 300
Participants
The participants were recruited from Australian university from 1st year psychology with
accomplished from course credit.
Age: From 18 to 67
Participant age
Frequency Percent Valid Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid 18 24 21.1 22.4 22.4
19 28 24.6 26.2 48.6
20 14 12.3 13.1 61.7
21 11 9.6 10.3 72.0
22 6 5.3 5.6 77.6
23 4 3.5 3.7 81.3
24 2 1.8 1.9 83.2
25 1 .9 .9 84.1
26 2 1.8 1.9 86.0
27 1 .9 .9 86.9
28 1 .9 .9 87.9

32 4 3.5 3.7 91.6
34 1 .9 .9 92.5
37 1 .9 .9 93.5
41 1 .9 .9 94.4
43 1 .9 .9 95.3
47 1 .9 .9 96.3
49 1 .9 .9 97.2
52 1 .9 .9 98.1
61 1 .9 .9 99.1
67 1 .9 .9 100.0
Total 107 93.9 100.0
Missing System 7 6.1
Total 114 100.0
Gender:
In this experiment, there were total 48.25 male, 47.4% female and others were 1.8% as
its aggregate was 111 but in this system 3 participants gender was missing.
Design
Independent variable: Age, gender
Dependent variable: Drinking alcohol
Materials
The participants were asked about support for increasing drinking age to 21 or not. In this
situation, they have set various conditions which were classified in two groups. The group 1 was
who disagree for not supporting to raise drinking age to 21 were assigned one or two condition
on random basis. In the similar aspect, participants of control condition were asked top express
their opinion and reason for not changing to 21 years. This group was replicated as experimental

group. With context of both condition, all participants were instructed for persuasiveness with
possibility of different arguments. They collected response to various statement for giving
measure of participant agreement after experimental manipulation which are:
1. 18 year old do not drink alcohol responsibly.
2. 18 year old often engage in binge drinking.
3. 18 year old are not mature in their alcohol consumption.
4. Raising the legal drinking age would help reduce road deaths.
5. Raising the legal drinking age would help reduce binge drinking.
6. The legal age for drinking alcohol should be examined carefully.
7. Raising legal drinking age would reduce alcohol or drug abuse.
8. The legal age for drinking alcohol should be raised to 21 years.
9. The legal age for drinking alcohol should be examined by politicians, scientists and
general public.
Procedure
In this study, the outcome has been evaluated with statistical tool SPSS on responses of
situation with group who doesn't support raising of drinking age to 21.
Statistical package for social sciences which is used for analysing data and to extract text data
which could get outcome of different research projects (SPSS with its benefits, 2018).

RESULTS
The above table is signifying statement of 18 year old do not drink alcohol in responsible
method where approximate 36% agree with this but 2.6% strongly disagree with this statement.
The majority of participants falls in neutral mode as 41.2% and 19.3% disagree with that 18
years old are not drinking alcohol in responsible aspect.

In this study, 52.7% participants are comprised in control group as they do not get any
treatment and implied as benchmark and 47.45 are considered in experimental group who has
gained experimental procedure for testing selected sample.

In this study, it had been articulated that 7.95 disagree that 18 years old often involves in
binge drinking but 76.3% agree with this where 19.3% strongly agree for binge drinking. In the
similar aspect 15.85 participants were comprised in neutral mode.

The participants have given responses on statement with 18 year old are not mature by
consuming alcohol. Here 26.3% agree about immaturity where 8.8% strongly agree and 44.7%
are considered in neutral mode. On the contrary, minor portion of 3.3% strongly disagree and
23.7% are contradicting to this statement.

With context of reducing road deaths, the legal drinking age should be raised is said by
22.8% and 23.7% neither disagree nor agree. But 53.5% disagree in which 17.5% were strongly
disagreed with this increment of drinking age.

There is representation of responses for increasing drinking age helps in reducing binge
drinking which was only agreed by 10.5% but 76.4% were not ion favour where 36% were
strongly disagreed and 13.2% have given neutral answer.

The legal age for consuming alcohol must be examined carefully is said by approx 65%
where 21.9% were strongly agreed. In this context, 21.1% were neither disagree nor agree for
examining carefully about legal age however 2.6% were strongly disagreed and 10.5% were
denying to this statement.

The statement of increasing legal drinking age would directly decrease abuse of alcohol
and drug where 17.5% has reflected neutral answer but approx 10% has agreed. However, 30.7%
were strongly disagreed and 41.2% was directly disagree with this statement.

The legal age of consuming alcohol must be increased to 21 years was agreed by 8.8%
but 26.3% were in neutral mode. In the similar context, 21.9% and 43% were strongly disagree
and disagree respectively to specified scenario.

The participant were disagreed with statement that legal age for consuming alcohol must
be examined through scientists, public and politicians as of approximate 18% and 20.2% were in
neutral mode. In the similar aspect, 49.1% were agreed and 12.3% were strongly disagreed with
this statement.
DISCUSSION
There are presence of 114 participants who have examined theory of cognitive
dissonance for consuming alcohol about legal drinking age. This experiment is viewed within
very interesting psychological and historical context as direct engagement of direct test of
mentalistic vs theory of behaviour. From the study, it had been stated that 18 years old are
engaged in binge drinking which signifies cognitive approach and to observe inward for
extracting about brain with its interpretation to stimuli. In the similar aspect to reduce road
deaths, legal drinking age must be raised but it is highlighting thought process of people.
In this study, it had been articulated that legal age should be examined carefully that
dissonance is beneficial for one who are not faithful to their brain and to change behaviour for

better aspect. Cognitive dissonance would be predicting that legal age of drinking should be
raised to 21 years and must be examined through scientists, politicians and public. In this
context, it would create dissonance among belief among action carried and resolving actions. It
has not considered various factors which are creating impact on behaviour such as chemical
imbalances and biological structure. This would directly lead to human behaviour with various
people for accounting each individual in separate aspect.

REFERENCES
Books and Journals
Chang, T. Y., Solomon, D. H., & Westerfield, M. M. (2016). Looking for someone to blame:
Delegation, cognitive dissonance, and the disposition effect. The Journal of
Finance. 71(1). 267-302.
Festinger, L. (1962). A theory of cognitive dissonance (Vol. 2). Stanford university press.
Harmon-Jones, E., Harmon-Jones, C., & Levy, N. (2015). An action-based model of cognitive-
dissonance processes.Current Directions in Psychological Science, 24(3), 184-189.
Hinojosa, A. S., Gardner, W. L., Walker, H. J., Cogliser, C., & Gullifor, D. (2017). A review of
cognitive dissonance theory in management research: Opportunities for further
development.Journal of Management. 43(1). 170-199.
Rabbi, J. M., Brehm, J. W., & Cohen, A. R. (1959). Verbalization and reactions to cognitive
dissonance 1. Journal of Personality. 27(3). 407-417.
van der Kolk, B., & Kaufmann, W. (2018). Performance measurement, cognitive dissonance and
coping strategies: exploring individual responses to NPM-inspired output control.Journal
of Management Control. 1-21.
ONLINE
SPSS with its benefits. 2018. [Online]. Available
through<https://www.surveygizmo.com/resources/blog/what-is-spss/>.

APPENDICES
Statistics
Parti
cipa
nt
ident
ificat
ion
num
ber
Parti
cipa
nt
age
Parti
cipa
nt
gend
er
1.
18-
year-
olds
do
not
drink
alco
hol
resp
onsi
bly
The
cond
ition
the
parti
cipa
nt is
in
N Va
lid 114 107 111 114 114
Mi
ssi
ng
0 7 3 0 0
Statistics
2. 18-
year-
olds
often
engage
in binge
drinking
3. 18-
year-
olds are
not
mature
in their
alcohol
consum
ption
5.
Raising
the legal
drinking
age
would
help
reduce
road
deaths
4.
Raising
the legal
drinking
age
would
help
reduce
binge
drinking
7. The
legal age
for
drinking
alcohol
should
be
examine
d
carefully
N Vali
d 114 112 114 114 114
Miss
ing 0 2 0 0 0

Statistics
6. Raising the legal
drinking age would
reduce drug and
alcohol abuse
8. The legal age for
drinking alcohol
should be raised to
21 years
9. The legal age for
drinking alcohol
should be examined
by politicians,
scientists and the
general public
N Valid 114 114 114
Missing 0 0 0
Frequency Table
Participant identification number
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid 1.00 1 .9 .9 .9
3.00 1 .9 .9 1.8
7.00 1 .9 .9 2.6
8.00 1 .9 .9 3.5
9.00 1 .9 .9 4.4
10.00 1 .9 .9 5.3
12.00 1 .9 .9 6.1
13.00 1 .9 .9 7.0
15.00 1 .9 .9 7.9
17.00 1 .9 .9 8.8
18.00 1 .9 .9 9.6
19.00 1 .9 .9 10.5
20.00 1 .9 .9 11.4

23.00 1 .9 .9 12.3
24.00 1 .9 .9 13.2
25.00 1 .9 .9 14.0
26.00 1 .9 .9 14.9
27.00 1 .9 .9 15.8
28.00 1 .9 .9 16.7
29.00 1 .9 .9 17.5
30.00 1 .9 .9 18.4
31.00 1 .9 .9 19.3
32.00 1 .9 .9 20.2
35.00 1 .9 .9 21.1
36.00 1 .9 .9 21.9
38.00 1 .9 .9 22.8
39.00 1 .9 .9 23.7
40.00 1 .9 .9 24.6
42.00 1 .9 .9 25.4
45.00 1 .9 .9 26.3
46.00 1 .9 .9 27.2
48.00 1 .9 .9 28.1
50.00 1 .9 .9 28.9
51.00 1 .9 .9 29.8
52.00 1 .9 .9 30.7
53.00 1 .9 .9 31.6
54.00 1 .9 .9 32.5
55.00 1 .9 .9 33.3
56.00 1 .9 .9 34.2
57.00 1 .9 .9 35.1
58.00 1 .9 .9 36.0
60.00 1 .9 .9 36.8
61.00 1 .9 .9 37.7
62.00 1 .9 .9 38.6
64.00 1 .9 .9 39.5
65.00 1 .9 .9 40.4
66.00 1 .9 .9 41.2
67.00 1 .9 .9 42.1
68.00 1 .9 .9 43.0
69.00 1 .9 .9 43.9
73.00 1 .9 .9 44.7

74.00 1 .9 .9 45.6
75.00 1 .9 .9 46.5
76.00 1 .9 .9 47.4
77.00 1 .9 .9 48.2
78.00 1 .9 .9 49.1
79.00 1 .9 .9 50.0
80.00 1 .9 .9 50.9
82.00 1 .9 .9 51.8
83.00 1 .9 .9 52.6
85.00 1 .9 .9 53.5
87.00 1 .9 .9 54.4
88.00 1 .9 .9 55.3
89.00 1 .9 .9 56.1
90.00 1 .9 .9 57.0
91.00 1 .9 .9 57.9
92.00 1 .9 .9 58.8
93.00 1 .9 .9 59.6
94.00 1 .9 .9 60.5
95.00 1 .9 .9 61.4
96.00 1 .9 .9 62.3
97.00 1 .9 .9 63.2
98.00 1 .9 .9 64.0
99.00 1 .9 .9 64.9
100.00 1 .9 .9 65.8
101.00 1 .9 .9 66.7
102.00 1 .9 .9 67.5
103.00 1 .9 .9 68.4
104.00 1 .9 .9 69.3
105.00 1 .9 .9 70.2
107.00 1 .9 .9 71.1
108.00 1 .9 .9 71.9
109.00 1 .9 .9 72.8
110.00 1 .9 .9 73.7
111.00 1 .9 .9 74.6
113.00 1 .9 .9 75.4
115.00 1 .9 .9 76.3
117.00 1 .9 .9 77.2
118.00 1 .9 .9 78.1

119.00 1 .9 .9 78.9
120.00 1 .9 .9 79.8
121.00 1 .9 .9 80.7
125.00 1 .9 .9 81.6
126.00 1 .9 .9 82.5
127.00 1 .9 .9 83.3
128.00 1 .9 .9 84.2
129.00 1 .9 .9 85.1
131.00 1 .9 .9 86.0
132.00 1 .9 .9 86.8
133.00 1 .9 .9 87.7
134.00 1 .9 .9 88.6
135.00 1 .9 .9 89.5
137.00 1 .9 .9 90.4
138.00 1 .9 .9 91.2
139.00 1 .9 .9 92.1
145.00 1 .9 .9 93.0
146.00 1 .9 .9 93.9
147.00 1 .9 .9 94.7
151.00 1 .9 .9 95.6
153.00 1 .9 .9 96.5
154.00 1 .9 .9 97.4
155.00 1 .9 .9 98.2
157.00 1 .9 .9 99.1
158.00 1 .9 .9 100.0
Total 114 100.0 100.0

Participant age
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid 18 24 21.1 22.4 22.4
19 28 24.6 26.2 48.6
20 14 12.3 13.1 61.7
21 11 9.6 10.3 72.0
22 6 5.3 5.6 77.6
23 4 3.5 3.7 81.3
24 2 1.8 1.9 83.2
25 1 .9 .9 84.1
26 2 1.8 1.9 86.0
27 1 .9 .9 86.9
28 1 .9 .9 87.9
32 4 3.5 3.7 91.6
34 1 .9 .9 92.5
37 1 .9 .9 93.5
41 1 .9 .9 94.4
43 1 .9 .9 95.3
47 1 .9 .9 96.3
49 1 .9 .9 97.2
52 1 .9 .9 98.1
61 1 .9 .9 99.1
67 1 .9 .9 100.0
Total 107 93.9 100.0
Missing System 7 6.1
Total 114 100.0

Participant gender
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid Male 55 48.2 49.5 49.5
Female 54 47.4 48.6 98.2
Identify other than
male/female 2 1.8 1.8 100.0
Total 111 97.4 100.0
Missing System 3 2.6
Total 114 100.0
1. 18-year-olds do not drink alcohol responsibly
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid Strongly Disagree 3 2.6 2.6 2.6
Disagree 22 19.3 19.3 21.9
Neither Agree nor
Disagree 47 41.2 41.2 63.2
Agree 36 31.6 31.6 94.7
Strongly Agree 6 5.3 5.3 100.0
Total 114 100.0 100.0

The condition the participant is in
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid Control Group 60 52.6 52.6 52.6
Experimental
Group 54 47.4 47.4 100.0
Total 114 100.0 100.0
2. 18-year-olds often engage in binge drinking
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid Disagree 9 7.9 7.9 7.9
Neither Agree nor
Disagree 18 15.8 15.8 23.7
Agree 65 57.0 57.0 80.7
Strongly Agree 22 19.3 19.3 100.0
Total 114 100.0 100.0
3. 18-year-olds are not mature in their alcohol consumption
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid Strongly Disagree 4 3.5 3.6 3.6
Disagree 27 23.7 24.1 27.7

Neither Agree nor
Disagree 51 44.7 45.5 73.2
Agree 20 17.5 17.9 91.1
Strongly Agree 10 8.8 8.9 100.0
Total 112 98.2 100.0
Missing System 2 1.8
Total 114 100.0
5. Raising the legal drinking age would help reduce road deaths
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid Strongly Disagree 20 17.5 17.5 17.5
Disagree 41 36.0 36.0 53.5
Neither Agree nor
Disagree 27 23.7 23.7 77.2
Agree 22 19.3 19.3 96.5
Strongly Agree 4 3.5 3.5 100.0
Total 114 100.0 100.0
4. Raising the legal drinking age would help reduce binge drinking
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid Strongly Disagree 41 36.0 36.0 36.0
Disagree 46 40.4 40.4 76.3
Neither Agree nor
Disagree 15 13.2 13.2 89.5
Agree 11 9.6 9.6 99.1
Strongly Agree 1 .9 .9 100.0

Total 114 100.0 100.0
7. The legal age for drinking alcohol should be examined carefully
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid Strongly Disagree 3 2.6 2.6 2.6
Disagree 12 10.5 10.5 13.2
Neither Agree nor
Disagree 24 21.1 21.1 34.2
Agree 50 43.9 43.9 78.1
Strongly Agree 25 21.9 21.9 100.0
Total 114 100.0 100.0
6. Raising the legal drinking age would reduce drug and alcohol abuse
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid Strongly Disagree 35 30.7 30.7 30.7
Disagree 47 41.2 41.2 71.9
Neither Agree nor
Disagree 20 17.5 17.5 89.5
Agree 10 8.8 8.8 98.2
Strongly Agree 2 1.8 1.8 100.0
Total 114 100.0 100.0
8. The legal age for drinking alcohol should be raised to 21 years
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid Strongly Disagree 25 21.9 21.9 21.9
Disagree 49 43.0 43.0 64.9
Neither Agree nor
Disagree
30 26.3 26.3 91.2

Agree 10 8.8 8.8 100.0
Total 114 100.0 100.0
9. The legal age for drinking alcohol should be examined by politicians,
scientists and the general public
Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid Strongly Disagree 2 1.8 1.8 1.8
Disagree 19 16.7 16.7 18.4
Neither Agree nor
Disagree 23 20.2 20.2 38.6
Agree 56 49.1 49.1 87.7
Strongly Agree 14 12.3 12.3 100.0
Total 114 100.0 100.0