COGNITIVE CONSISTENCY THEORIESKahan, James P., and Amnon Rapoport 1984 Theories of
Coalition Formation. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates.
Komorita, S.S., and Charles E. Miller 1986 ‘‘Bargaining
Strength as a Function of Coalition Alternatives.’’
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 51:325–332.
Lemieux, Vincent 1997 ‘‘Reseaux et Coalitions.’’ L’Annee
Sociologique 47:1:55–71.
Lupia, Arthur, and Kaare Strom 1995 ‘‘Coalition Termi-
nation and the Strategic Timing of Parliamentary
Elections.’’ American Political Science Review 89:648–665.
Mershon, Carol 1996 ‘‘The Costs of Coalition: Coalition
Theories and Italian Governments.’’ American Politi-
cal Science Review 90:3:534–554.
Miller, Charles E., and R. Crandall 1980 ‘‘Experimental
Research on the Social Psychology of Bargaining and
Coalition Formation.’’ In R. Paulus, ed., Psychology of
Group Influence. Hillsdale, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates.
Mills, Theodore M. 1953 ‘‘Power Relations in Three-
Person Groups.’’ American Sociological Review
18:351–357.
Murnighan, J. Keith 1978 ‘‘Models of Coalition Behav-
ior: Game Theoretic, Social Psychological, and Politi-
cal Perspectives.’’ Psychological Bulletin 85:1130–1153.
Nail, Paul, and Steven G. Cole 1985 ‘‘Three Theories of
Coalition Behavior: A Probabilistic Extension.’’ Brit-
ish Journal of Social Psychology 24:181–190.
Nash, John 1951 ‘‘Non-cooperative games.’’ Annals of
Mathematics 54:286–95.
Nicholson, Michael 1992 Rationality and the Analysis of
International Conflict. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge
University Press.
Prasnikar, V., and A. E. Roth 1992 ‘‘Considerations of
fairness and strategy: Experimental evidence from
sequential games.’’ Quarterly Journal of Economics
107:865–868.
Riker, William H. 1962 The Theory of Political Coalitions.
New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Rodgers, Joseph Lee, and Vaida D. Thompson 1986
‘‘Towards a General Framework of Family Structure:
A Review of Theory-Based Empirical Research.’’ Popu-
lation and Environment 8:143–171.
Rose, Irene Kathryn 1986 ‘‘Testing Coalition Theory in
the Great Gatsby and the Rabbit Trilogy.’’ Ph.D.
diss., University of Oklahoma.
Russo, Richard B., and Natalie Russo 1988 ‘‘Parental
Punishment and Sibling Aggression.’’ Social Psycho-
logical Quarterly 51:11–18.
Sened, Itai 1996 ‘‘A Model of Coalition Formation:
Theory and Evidence.’’ Journal of Politics 58:2:350–372.
Simmel, Georg 1902 ‘‘The Number of Members as
Determining the Sociological Form of the Group.’’
American Journal of Sociology 8:1–46; 158–196.
Tsebilis, G. 1990 Nested Games; Rational Choice in Com-
parative Politics. Berkeley: University of Califor-
nia Press.
Von Neumann, John and Oskar Morgenstern 1944
Theory of Games and Economic Behavior. 2d ed. Prince-
ton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.
Wood, Stewart, and Iain McLean 1995 ‘‘Recent Work in
Game Theory and Coalition Theory.’’ Political Studies
43:703–717.
Yi, Sang-Seung 1996 ‘‘Endogenous Formation of Cus-
toms Unions under Imperfect Competition.’’ Journal
of International Economics 41:1–2; 153–177.
Zagare, Frank C. 1984 Game Theory: Concepts and Appli-
cations. Beverly Hills, Calif.: Sage Publications.THEODORE CAPLOWCOGNITIVE CONSISTENCY
THEORIESCognitive consistency theories have their origins
in the principles of Gestalt psychology, which
suggests that people seek to perceive the environ-
ment in ways that are simple and coherent (Köhler
1929). Cognitive consistency theories have their
beginnings in a number of seemingly unrelated
research areas (Eagly and Chaiken 1993). Early
consistency theorists drew upon theories of con-
flict (Lewin 1935; Miller 1944), memory (Miller
1956), and the intolerance for ambiguity by those
with an authoritarian personality (Adorno, Frenkel-
Brunswick, Levinson, and Stanford 1950). Accord-
ing to Newcomb (1968a), social scientists should
not have been surprised at the rise of cognitive
consistency theories. He points to a truism that in
any field of scientific inquiry, there is an inevitable
movement from description of the elements of the
field, to understanding the relationships between
them. At the heart of cognitive consistency theo-
ries is the assumption that people are motivated to
seek coherent attitudes, thoughts, beliefs, values,
behaviors, and feelings. If these are inconsistent,
they will produce a ‘‘tension state’’ in the individu-
al, and motivate the individual to reduce this
tension. Individuals reduce this tension, according