Cognitive dissonance

From Free net encyclopedia

Cognitive dissonance is the perception of incompatibility between two cognitions, which can be defined as any element of knowledge, attitude, emotion, belief or value, or a goal, plan, or interest. The theory of cognitive dissonance holds that contradicting cognitions serve as a driving force that compels the mind to acquire or invent new thoughts or beliefs, or to modify existing beliefs, so as to minimize the amount of dissonance (conflict) between cognitions. Experiments have attempted to quantify this hypothetical drive.

Cognitive dissonance is a condition first proposed by the psychologist Leon Festinger in 1956.

An example of cognitive dissonance is the phenomenon known as buyer's remorse, in which a consumer becomes conflicted, after the fact, with the issue of whether or not their decision to make a purchase was, indeed, a wise one.

1 Origins and one of the first experiments testing the theory
2 Conflicting cognitions: cognitive dissonance
3 Two kinds of dissonance
4 Further propositions by Festinger
5 References
6 See also
7 External links

[edit]

Origins and one of the first experiments testing the theory

In Festinger and Carlsmith's classic 1959 experiment, students were made to perform tedious and meaningless tasks, consisting of turning pegs quarter-turns, then removing them from a board, then putting them back in, and so forth. Subjects rated these tasks very negatively. After a long period of doing this, students were told the experiment was over and they could leave.

However, the experimenter then asked the subject for a small favor. They were told that a needed research assistant was not able to make it to the experiment, and the subject was asked to fill in and try to persuade another subject (who was actually a confederate) that the dull, boring tasks the subject had just completed were actually interesting and engaging. Some subjects were paid $20 for the favor, another group was paid $1, and a control group was not requested to perform the favor.

When asked to rate the peg-turning tasks later, those in the $1 group rated them more positively than those in the $20 group and control group. Experimenters theorized that when paid only $1, students were forced to internalize the attitude they were induced to express, because they had no other justification. Those in the $20 condition, it is argued, had an obvious external justification for their behavior.

The researchers further speculated that with only $1, subjects faced insufficient justification and therefore "cognitive dissonance", so when they were asked to lie about the tasks, they sought to relieve this hypothetical stress by changing their attitude. This process allows the subject to genuinely believe that the tasks were enjoyable.

Put simply, the experimenters concluded that human beings, when asked to lie without being given sufficient justification, will convince themselves that the lie they are asked to tell is the truth.

Festinger further tested his theory on observations of counterintuitive belief persistence of most members of a UFO doomsday cult and their increased proselytization after the leader's prophecy failed.

[edit]

Conflicting cognitions: cognitive dissonance

Once two mutually-exclusive cognitions are held, the individual can be said to be in a state of "cognitive dissonance". For instance: The individual purchases a given brand of washing machine, having been advised by a trusted co-worker that said machine is the best. Subsequent to this purchase, the buyer is exposed to another cognition, one which informs her that there is a higher quality, less expensive washing machine on the market. Moreover, the new source is even more trustworthy than the well-meaning co-worker, e.g. "Consumer Reports" or "Good Housekeeping". Instantly, this conflicting cognition creates an imbalance ("buyer's remorse") between itself and the original cognition. This conflicted state of mind will, necessarily, seek to attain psychological consonance, i.e. a balance between competing cognitions.

[edit]

Two kinds of dissonance

When a test showed that feminist subjects had latent sexist attitudes, they later awarded a female a larger reward than a male in what they were told was a different study. Researchers hypothesized that subjects reduced dissonance by attempting to show that they were not sexist in the later decision.

Many studies have shown that people with compulsive disorders like gambling will subjectively reinforce decisions or commitments they have already made. In one experiment, experimenters found that bettors at a horse track believed bets were more likely to succeed immediately after being placed. According to the hypothesis, the possibility of being wrong is dissonance-arousing, so people will change their perceptions to make their decisions seem better.

Post-decisional dissonance may be increased by the importance of the issue, the length of time the subject takes to make or avoid the decision, and the extent to which the decision could be reversed.

[edit]

Further propositions by Festinger

Festinger proposed that cognitive dissonance is a "negative drive state", a similar psychological tension to hunger and thirst and that people will seek to resolve this tension.

Reduction of cognitive dissonance may be good because one feels better, and because one can come closer to consonance by eliminating contradictions. On the other hand some of the ways of reduction of cognitive dissonance involve a distortion of the truth, which may cause wrong decisions.

When confronted with two belief cognitions that contradict each other, Festinger suggests the dissonance can be resolved by finding and adding a third piece of information relevant to the two beliefs.

[edit]

References

Festinger, Leon; co-authors Henry W. Riecken and Stanley Schachter When Prophecy fails a Social and Psychological Study of a Modern Group That Predicted the Destruction of the World (1956)
Festinger, L. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
Festinger, L. and Carlsmith, J. M. (1959). "Cognitive consequences of forced compliance". Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 58, 203-211. Full text.
Harmon-Jones, E., & Mills, J. (1999). Cognitive Dissonance: Progress on a pivotal theory in social psychology. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Sherman, S. J., & Gorkin, R. B. (1980). "Attitude bolstering when behavior is inconsistent with central attitudes". Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 16, 388-403.
Knox, R. E., & Inkster, J. A. (1968). "Postdecision dissonance at post time". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 8, 319-323.