Dickerson et al., concluded from their experiment on water conservation that:

        a) More traditional dissonance research using counter-attitudinal methods are more cost effective in changing

             behavior in the long run.

        b) Dissonance experienced using pro-attitudinal advocacy research paradigms may prove to be a cost-effective

             method for policy makers to employ in variety of settings, especially those in which the goal is to produce higher

             levels of consistency between attitudes and beliefs.

        c) Dissonance-related persuasion techniques work well in changing attitudes and behavior, however they are time

            consuming and expensive to carry out compared to other strategies like hanging signs or posting flyers.

        d) More research is needed to empirically validate the use of persuasion techniques in changing behavior.