Have you ever done something that totally goes against your attitudes or beliefs? Well, you're not alone, because people tend to perform behaviors that they feel are totally "not them". This happens so frequently in fact, that this phenomena is now one of the most widely studied in the field of social psychology. This is known as cognitive dissonance theory, which occurs when people have thoughts that are inconsistent with their beliefs, and as a result faces psychological and physiological tension that they strive to reduce (Festinger, 1957). One of the main ways people solve this tension is by changing their attitudes.
There are three dissonance paradigms in which cognitive dissonance can occur in people. First is induced compliance which occurs when someone convinces us to perform a behavior that is not in alignment with our attitudes, but this can only happen when the person feels that they have a say in the matter (Festinger, 1957). For example, we won't feel the dissonance if an authority figure is commanding us to perform the behavior, as then we would just convince ourselves that it was due to the situation that were forced in. The interesting part about induced compliance is that a mild reward is more powerful than a larger award (Festinger & Carlsmith, 1959). The exact opposite of this effect is known as insufficient deterrence, where mild punishments have a larger effect on attitude change than severe punishments. The second paradigm is known as effort justification which in general states that people come to love what they have suffered for (Aronson & Mills, 1959). For example, if I invest a lot of money in buying a car or a house, I will convince myself that I love it no matter how shitty it may actually be. The last paradigm is post-decision dissonance which occurs when we choose one of two options that we both want (Brehm, 1956). The way we deal with this dissonance is by over valuing the positives of the option we chose, and undervaluing the positives of the option we didn't choose.
We all know that everyone goes through dissonance at some point, some creating more sever tension than others. One of the times that really sticks out to me occurred when I was a freshman in college. I tried smoking cigarettes, and though I enjoyed the process of socializing with my friends, it created severe tension as I knew the entire long list of negative side effects that will inevitably occur. Because of this, I couldn't think about anything else, and I inevitably stopped smoking, as the attitudes I had were far to strong.
Word Count: 436
References
Aronson, E. & Mills, J. (1959). The effect of severity of initiation on liking for a group. Journal of
Abnormal and Social Psychology, 59, 177-181
Brehm, J.W. (1956). Post-decision changes in desirability of alternatives. Journal of Abnormal and Social
Psychology, 52, 384-389
Festinger, L. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Stanford, CA.
Festinger, L. & Carlsmith, J.M. (1959). Cognitive consequences of forced compliance. Journal of
Abnormal and Social Psychology, 58, 203-210.
There are three dissonance paradigms in which cognitive dissonance can occur in people. First is induced compliance which occurs when someone convinces us to perform a behavior that is not in alignment with our attitudes, but this can only happen when the person feels that they have a say in the matter (Festinger, 1957). For example, we won't feel the dissonance if an authority figure is commanding us to perform the behavior, as then we would just convince ourselves that it was due to the situation that were forced in. The interesting part about induced compliance is that a mild reward is more powerful than a larger award (Festinger & Carlsmith, 1959). The exact opposite of this effect is known as insufficient deterrence, where mild punishments have a larger effect on attitude change than severe punishments. The second paradigm is known as effort justification which in general states that people come to love what they have suffered for (Aronson & Mills, 1959). For example, if I invest a lot of money in buying a car or a house, I will convince myself that I love it no matter how shitty it may actually be. The last paradigm is post-decision dissonance which occurs when we choose one of two options that we both want (Brehm, 1956). The way we deal with this dissonance is by over valuing the positives of the option we chose, and undervaluing the positives of the option we didn't choose.
We all know that everyone goes through dissonance at some point, some creating more sever tension than others. One of the times that really sticks out to me occurred when I was a freshman in college. I tried smoking cigarettes, and though I enjoyed the process of socializing with my friends, it created severe tension as I knew the entire long list of negative side effects that will inevitably occur. Because of this, I couldn't think about anything else, and I inevitably stopped smoking, as the attitudes I had were far to strong.
Word Count: 436
References
Aronson, E. & Mills, J. (1959). The effect of severity of initiation on liking for a group. Journal of
Abnormal and Social Psychology, 59, 177-181
Brehm, J.W. (1956). Post-decision changes in desirability of alternatives. Journal of Abnormal and Social
Psychology, 52, 384-389
Festinger, L. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Stanford, CA.
Festinger, L. & Carlsmith, J.M. (1959). Cognitive consequences of forced compliance. Journal of
Abnormal and Social Psychology, 58, 203-210.
I like to think that since taking this class I have learned so much more about myself and human behavior. This notion being relevant to the topic of smoking. I have many friends that have smoked for a long time and some that did not start until recently. After reading your blog and thinking about it, I think it would be interesting to look at smoking in terms of cognitive dissonance, because I also have many friends that used to smoke. I have never really thought about cognitive dissonance in terms of a habit, so I found your blog to be particularly interesting.
ReplyDelete