Difference between revisions of "Cognitive dissonance" - New World Encyclopedia

From New World Encyclopedia
Line 2: Line 2:
 
[[Category:Psychology]]
 
[[Category:Psychology]]
 
{{Contracted}}
 
{{Contracted}}
−
'''Cognitive dissonance''' is concerned with an incompatibility of the relationship between two cognitions. Cognitions, defined as any 'piece of [[knowledge]]', may entail an emotion, value, behavior, and so forth. 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, in order to reduce the amount of dissonance (conflict) between cognitions.  
+
'''Cognitive dissonance''' is concerned with an incompatibility of the relationship between two cognitions. Cognitions, defined as any 'piece of knowledge', may entail an emotion, value, behavior, and so forth. 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, in order to reduce the amount of dissonance (conflict) between cognitions.  
  
 
The theory of cognitive dissonance was developed by the [[psychology|psychologist]] [[Leon Festinger]] in 1957 after observing the counterintuitive persistence of members of a [[Unidentified flying object|UFO]] doomsday cult and their increased proselytization after the leader's prophecy failed. The failed message of earth's destruction, sent by aliens to a suburban housewife in 1956, became a ''disconfirmed expectancy'' that increased dissonance between cognitions, thereby causing most members of the impromptu cult to lessen the dissonance by accepting a new prophecy; that the aliens had instead spared the planet for their sake.[http://www.candleinthedark.com/festinger.html]
 
The theory of cognitive dissonance was developed by the [[psychology|psychologist]] [[Leon Festinger]] in 1957 after observing the counterintuitive persistence of members of a [[Unidentified flying object|UFO]] doomsday cult and their increased proselytization after the leader's prophecy failed. The failed message of earth's destruction, sent by aliens to a suburban housewife in 1956, became a ''disconfirmed expectancy'' that increased dissonance between cognitions, thereby causing most members of the impromptu cult to lessen the dissonance by accepting a new prophecy; that the aliens had instead spared the planet for their sake.[http://www.candleinthedark.com/festinger.html]
Line 11: Line 11:
 
For the most part, this causes people who feel dissonance to seek information that will reduce dissonance and avoid information that will increase dissonance. People who are involuntarily exposed to information that increases dissonance are likely to discount such information, by either ignoring it, misinterpreting it, or denying it.
 
For the most part, this causes people who feel dissonance to seek information that will reduce dissonance and avoid information that will increase dissonance. People who are involuntarily exposed to information that increases dissonance are likely to discount such information, by either ignoring it, misinterpreting it, or denying it.
  
−
The introduction of a new cognition or a "piece of knowledge" that is "dissonant" with a currently held cognition creates a state of "dissonance." The magnitude of which correlates to the relative importance of the involved cognitions. Dissonance can be reduced either by eliminating  dissonant cognitions or by adding new consonant cognitions.It is usually found that when there is a discrepancy between an attitude and a behavior, it is more likely that the attude will adjust itself to accomodate the behavior.
+
The introduction of a new cognition or a "piece of knowledge" that is "dissonant" with a currently held cognition creates a state of "dissonance." The magnitude of which correlates to the relative importance of the involved cognitions. Dissonance can be reduced either by eliminating  dissonant cognitions or by adding new consonant cognitions.It is usually found that when there is a discrepancy between an attitude and a behavior, it is more likely that the attitude will adjust itself to accomodate the behavior.
  
−
==Criticisms of the Festinger's Basic Theory==
+
==Qualifications of Festinger's Basic Theory==
  
−
Aronson (1969) challenged the basic theory by linking it to the self-concept. He believed that cognitive dissonance did not arise because people experience dissonance between conflicting cognitions; rather, it surfaced when people saw their actions as conflicting with their self-concept. According to Aronson, people would not experience dissonance in their situation as long as their self-concept wasn't put into question.
+
In 1965, Daryl Bem (1965; 1967) proposed the self-perception theory as an alternative to cognitive dissonance theory. This contends that people do not have inner access to their own attitudes and are therefore unable to determine whether or not they are in conflict. According to Bem, the inner workings Festinger's original study was the result of the participants inferring their attitudes from their behavior. Bem, whose self-perception theory was based largely on the behaviorism of [[B.F. Skinner]], interpreted that those paid twenty dollars in the Festinger and Carlsmith study were unable to interpret their vocal behavior as an example of what behaviorists such as [[B.F. Skinner]] call "mands"  - that is, elements of speech that are commands and demands rather than mere statements. Consequently, these people would have not perceived their vocal utterances as being directly tied to their behavior
  
−
In 1971, Tedeschi has argued that maintaining cognitive consistency is a way to protect public self-image (Tedeschi, Schlenker & Bonoma, 1971). From 1965, Daryl Bem (1965; 1967) has proposed self-perception theory as an alternative to cognitive dissonance theory. This contends that people do not have inner access to their own attitudes and are therefore unable to determine whether or not they are in conflict. Bem the results Festinger's original study from the stance that the participants were inferring their attitudes from their behaviour. This self-perception theory was based largely on the behaviorism of  [[Burrhus Frederic Skinner|B.F. Skinner]]. Bem interprets those paid twenty dollars in the Festinger and Carlsmith study as being able to interpret their vocal behaviour as an example of what behaviourists such as [[B.F. Skinner]] call "mands"  - that is, elements of speech that are commands and demands rather than mere statements. Consequently, these people would have not seen their vocal behaviour as an utterance describing their behaviour.  
+
Aronson (1969) challenged the basic theory by linking it to the self-concept. He believed that cognitive dissonance did not arise because people experienced dissonance between conflicting cognitions; rather, it surfaced when people saw their actions as conflicting with their self-concept. According to Aronson, people would not experience dissonance in their situation as long as their self-concept wasn't put into evaluation. In 1971, somewhat similar to Aronson, Tedeschi argued that maintaining cognitive consistency is a way to protect public self-image (Tedeschi, Schlenker & Bonoma, 1971).  
  
−
Since, in many experimental situations, Bem's  theory and Festinger's theory make similar predictions, it has been very difficult for experimental social psychologists to design a conclusive experiment that will provide more evidence for one rather than the other of these two theories. However, advocates of dissonance theory sometimes argue that of these two theories, only Festinger's theory predicts that certain processes in social cognition will increase [[arousal]], although there is some dispute about how much Festinger's original theory really did imply that cognitive dissonance increased arousal. Therefore, from 1970 onwards, some psychologists have investigated whether being faced with situations where one's cognitions are likely to conflict, arousal is likely to increase, and have found experimental evidence that this is the case.
+
Since, in many experimental situations of cognitive dissonance many of the findings seem to possess some similarity, it has been very difficult for social psychologists to design a conclusive experiment that will provide more evidence for one particular theory.  
  
−
This study has been criticised, on the grounds that being paid twenty dollars may have aroused the suspicion of some participants. In the 1960s, experimenters used counter-attitudinal essay-writing, in which people were paid varying amounts of money (e.g. one or ten dollars) for writing essays expressing opinions contrary to their own. These studies also found support for dissonance theory.
+
==Cognitive Dissonance Research==
  
−
==Cognitive Dissonance Empirical Research==
+
Since its conception, experimenters have attempted to quantify cognitive dissonance. Several experimental methods have been used as evidence:
−
Since its conception, experiments have attempted to quantify cognitive dissonance. Several experimental methods were used as evidence for cognitive dissonance. These were:
 
  
 
* [[Induced Compliance Studies]], wherein participants are asked to act in ways contrary to their attitudes;
 
* [[Induced Compliance Studies]], wherein participants are asked to act in ways contrary to their attitudes;
 
* [[Postdecisional studies]], wherein the opinions of rejected alternatives after a decision are studied;
 
* [[Postdecisional studies]], wherein the opinions of rejected alternatives after a decision are studied;
−
* Historical examples of people seeking out information that is consonant rather than dissonant with their own views.
+
* Historical examples that seem to illustrate the psychological phenomenon of cognitive dissonance.  
  
 
==Induced Compliance Studies==
 
==Induced Compliance Studies==
Line 36: Line 35:
 
Before the participant left, the experimenter then asked a subject for a small favor. They were told that a needed research assistant since their's was unable to make it to the experiment. The participant was then asked to fill in and try to persuade another subject (who was actually an insider) that unfavorable tasks that the participant had just completed were interesting and engaging. The participants were sectioned into three groups. One group was paid $20 for the favor, another group was paid $1, and a control group was not offered any monetary award for the  
 
Before the participant left, the experimenter then asked a subject for a small favor. They were told that a needed research assistant since their's was unable to make it to the experiment. The participant was then asked to fill in and try to persuade another subject (who was actually an insider) that unfavorable tasks that the participant had just completed were interesting and engaging. The participants were sectioned into three groups. One group was paid $20 for the favor, another group was paid $1, and a control group was not offered any monetary award for the  
  
−
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. Festinger and Carlsmith percieved this as evidence for cognitive dissonance. They theorized that when paid only $1, students had no other justification were therefore forced to internalize the attitude they were induced to express. It is argued that those in the $20 group, had an obvious external justification for their behavior.
+
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. Festinger and Carlsmith perceived this as evidence for cognitive dissonance. They theorized that when paid only $1, students had no other justification were therefore forced to internalize the attitude they were induced to express. It is argued that those in the $20 group, had an obvious external justification for their behavior.
  
 
The researchers further speculated that since the subjects in the $1 group faced insufficient justification that they sought to relieve their resulting stress by changing their attitude. This process allows the subject to genuinely believe that the tasks were enjoyable. Simply put, 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.
 
The researchers further speculated that since the subjects in the $1 group faced insufficient justification that they sought to relieve their resulting stress by changing their attitude. This process allows the subject to genuinely believe that the tasks were enjoyable. Simply put, 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.
 +
 +
This study has been criticized, on the grounds that being paid twenty dollars may have aroused the suspicion of some participants. However, in the 1960s, experimenters used counter-attitudinal essay-writing, in which people were paid varying amounts of money (e.g. one or ten dollars) for writing essays expressing opinions contrary to their own. These studies also found support for dissonance theory.
 +
  
 
===Postdecisional Dissonance Studies===
 
===Postdecisional Dissonance Studies===
Line 50: Line 52:
 
[[Image:William_Miller.jpg|thumb|right|''William Miller'']]
 
[[Image:William_Miller.jpg|thumb|right|''William Miller'']]
  
−
Between [[1831]] and [[1844]], a Baptist preacher by the name of [[William Miller (preacher)|William Miller]], launched what has been called by historians as [[Second Great Awakening]]. Miller preached a set of fourteen rules for the interpretation of the [[Bible]].<ref>[http://www.earlysda.com/miller/views1.html#Rules%20of%20Scriptural%20Interpretation Miller's Rules of Scriptural Interpretation] </ref> Based on his study of the prophecy of {{bibleverse||Daniel|8:14|NKJV}}. Miller calculated that Jesus would return to Earth sometime between [[21 March]] [[1843]] and [[21 March]] [[1844]].<ref>[http://chi.gospelcom.net/DAILYF/2001/10/daily-10-22-2001.shtml Miller Mistakenly Set a Date for Christ's Return]</ref> After the latter date came and went, the date was revised and set as [[October 22]], [[1844]] based on the yearly [[Yom_Kippur|Day of Atonement]] in [[Karaite Judaism]].
+
Between [[1831]] and [[1844]], a Baptist preacher by the name of [[William Miller (preacher)|William Miller]], launched what has been called by historians as [[Second Great Awakening]]. Miller preached a set of fourteen rules for the interpretation of the [[Bible]].<ref>[http://www.earlysda.com/miller/views1.html#Rules%20of%20Scriptural%20Interpretation Miller's Rules of Scriptural Interpretation] </ref> Based on his study of the prophecy of {{bible verse||Daniel|8:14|NKJV}}. Miller calculated that Jesus would return to Earth sometime between [[21 March]] [[1843]] and [[21 March]] [[1844]].<ref>[http://chi.gospelcom.net/DAILYF/2001/10/daily-10-22-2001.shtml Miller Mistakenly Set a Date for Christ's Return]</ref> After the latter date came and went, the date was revised and set as [[October 22]], [[1844]] based on the yearly [[Yom_Kippur|Day of Atonement]] in [[Karaite Judaism]].
  
−
When Jesus did not appear, Miller's followers experienced what would be coined as "the Great Disappointment". Many of the followers left the movement. A group of the remaining followers concluded that the prophecy did not predict that Jesus would return to [[earth]] in 1844, but that the investigative judgement in [[heaven]] would begin in that year.  
+
When Jesus did not appear, Miller's followers experienced what would be coined as "the Great Disappointment". Many of the followers left the movement. A group of the remaining followers concluded that the prophecy did not predict that Jesus would return to [[earth]] in 1844, but that the investigative judgment in [[heaven]] would begin in that year.  
  
 
Miller recorded his personal disappointment in his memoirs: "Were I to live my life over again, with the same evidence that I then had, to be honest with God and man, I should have to do as I have done. I confess my error, and acknowledge my disappointment."<ref name="sears">William Sears ''Thief in the Night'' 1961 ISBN 085398008X George Ronald London </ref> Miller continued to wait for the Second Coming until his death in 1849.  
 
Miller recorded his personal disappointment in his memoirs: "Were I to live my life over again, with the same evidence that I then had, to be honest with God and man, I should have to do as I have done. I confess my error, and acknowledge my disappointment."<ref name="sears">William Sears ''Thief in the Night'' 1961 ISBN 085398008X George Ronald London </ref> Miller continued to wait for the Second Coming until his death in 1849.  
Line 61: Line 63:
 
=====Seventh-day Adventists=====
 
=====Seventh-day Adventists=====
  
−
When [[Seventh-day Adventist Church]] historians write about the morning of October 23 they refer to a vision said to have been received by [[Hiram Edson]] (1806-1882), an early Adventist. Edson claimed he had a vision that indicated the date predicted by Miller was in fact correct. Later Bible study and visions led to the belief by the early Seventh-day Adventists that Christ went into the second apartment of the heavenly sanctuary in 1844 to begin the investigative judgment of both righteous and wicked to see who is worthy of going to heaven.<ref name="sdafundamentals">[http://www.adventist.org/beliefs/fundamental/index.html 28 Fundamental SDA beliefs] #24</ref> This investigative judgment is said to take place prior to his second coming, which they believe to be very soon. A number of issues related to the doctrine of this investigative judgement were raised by Adventist theologian [[Desmond Ford]] in the 1970s.
+
When [[Seventh-day Adventist Church]] historians write about the morning of October 23 they refer to a vision said to have been received by [[Hiram Edson]] (1806-1882), an early Adventist. Edson claimed he had a vision that indicated the date predicted by Miller was correct. Further Bible study and visions led the early Seventh-day Adventists to believe that Christ went into the second apartment of the heavenly sanctuary in 1844 to begin the investigative judgment of both righteous and wicked in order to see who is worthy of going to heaven.<ref name="fundamentals">[http://www.adventist.org/beliefs/fundamental/index.html 28 Fundamental SDA beliefs] #24</ref> This investigative judgment is said to take place prior to his Second.  
  
 
=====Charles Taze Russell and Jehovah's Witnesses=====
 
=====Charles Taze Russell and Jehovah's Witnesses=====
  
−
[[Jonas Wendell]], an [[adventist]] preacher, experienced periods of weak faith after 1844. After studying bible chronology, he came to the conclusion that the [[Second Coming]] would be in 1868, and in 1870 published a booklet concluding it was to be in 1873.
+
Jonas Wendell, an adventist preacher, experienced periods of weak faith after 1844. After studying the chronology of the Bible, he came to the conclusion that the Second Coming would be in 1868, and in 1870 published a booklet concluding it was to be in 1873.
  
−
[[Charles Taze Russell]] was in turn influenced by Jonas Wendell (as well as by the [[Millerites]] in general), and predicted the [[Second Coming]] for 1874. One-time Millerite ministers [[George Storrs]] (1796-1879) and [[George Stetson]] proved to be a great assistance and guide to the development and growth of his worldwide ministry, the [[Bible Student movement]]. A schism in that movement occurred in 1933, where the leadership changed the date of the Second Coming to 1914. The main branch of that movement came to be known as the [[Jehovah's Witnesses]], while many members refused the change; [[Bible Students]] today still hold that the [[Second Coming]] was in [[1874]].
+
Charles Taze Russell who was strongly influenced by Jonas Wendell predicted the Second Coming for 1874. One-time Millerite ministers George Storrs (1796-1879) and George Stetson proved to be a great assistance and guide to the development and growth of his worldwide ministry, the [[Bible Student movement]]. A schism in that movement occurred in 1933, where the leadership changed the date of the Second Coming to 1914. The main branch of that movement came to be known as the [[Jehovah's Witnesses]], while many members refused the change; [[Bible Students]] today still hold that the Second Coming was in 1874.
  
 
=====Bahá'í=====
 
=====Bahá'í=====
Line 97: Line 99:
 
* Sherman, S. J., & Gorkin, R. B. (1980). "Attitude bolstering when behavior is inconsistent with central attitudes". ''Journal of Experimental Social Psychology'', 16, 388-403.
 
* 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.
 
* Knox, R. E., & Inkster, J. A. (1968). "Postdecision dissonance at post time". ''Journal of Personality and Social Psychology'', 8, 319-323.
 +
*Stone, Jon R. (2000). ''Expecting Armageddon: Essential Readings in Failed Prophecy''. Routledge. ISBN 041592331X.
 
*Tedeschi, J.T., Schlenker, B.R. & Bonoma, T.V. (1971). Cognitive dissonance: Private ratiocination or public spectacle? American Psychologist, 26, 685-695
 
*Tedeschi, J.T., Schlenker, B.R. & Bonoma, T.V. (1971). Cognitive dissonance: Private ratiocination or public spectacle? American Psychologist, 26, 685-695
−
 
−
==References==
 
−
<references />
 
−
 
−
*Stone, Jon R. (2000). ''Expecting Armageddon: Essential Readings in Failed Prophecy''. Routledge. ISBN 041592331X.
 
−
 
  
 
==External links==
 
==External links==
Line 111: Line 108:
 
* [http://psychclassics.yorku.ca/Festinger/index.htm Festinger and Carlsmith's original paper]
 
* [http://psychclassics.yorku.ca/Festinger/index.htm Festinger and Carlsmith's original paper]
 
* [http://www.freeminds.org/psych/propfail.htm ''When Prophecies Fail: A Sociological Perspective on Failed Expectation in the Watchtower Society''] by Randall Waters from the Bethel Ministries Newsletter May/June 1990 (now the ''Free Minds Journal'')
 
* [http://www.freeminds.org/psych/propfail.htm ''When Prophecies Fail: A Sociological Perspective on Failed Expectation in the Watchtower Society''] by Randall Waters from the Bethel Ministries Newsletter May/June 1990 (now the ''Free Minds Journal'')
−
 
−
 
−
==External links==
 
−
 
 
*[http://www-unix.oit.umass.edu/~aesop/aesop_fall94/palica/palica.html Story with pictures from umass.edu]
 
*[http://www-unix.oit.umass.edu/~aesop/aesop_fall94/palica/palica.html Story with pictures from umass.edu]
−
 
−
 
−
 
−
 
 
{{Credit3|Cognitive_dissonance|61062528|Great_Disappointment|61039637|The_Fox_and_the_Grapes|56179320|}}
 
{{Credit3|Cognitive_dissonance|61062528|Great_Disappointment|61039637|The_Fox_and_the_Grapes|56179320|}}

Revision as of 20:19, 10 July 2006


Cognitive dissonance is concerned with an incompatibility of the relationship between two cognitions. Cognitions, defined as any 'piece of knowledge', may entail an emotion, value, behavior, and so forth. 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, in order to reduce the amount of dissonance (conflict) between cognitions.

The theory of cognitive dissonance was developed by the psychologist Leon Festinger in 1957 after observing the counterintuitive persistence of members of a UFO doomsday cult and their increased proselytization after the leader's prophecy failed. The failed message of earth's destruction, sent by aliens to a suburban housewife in 1956, became a disconfirmed expectancy that increased dissonance between cognitions, thereby causing most members of the impromptu cult to lessen the dissonance by accepting a new prophecy; that the aliens had instead spared the planet for their sake.[1]

Basic theory

Cognitions which contradict each other are said to be "dissonant." Cognitions that follow from or fit with one another are said to be "consonant." "Irrelevant" cognitions are two cognitions that have nothing to do with one another. It is generally agreed that people prefer "consonance" in their cognitions, but whether this is the nature of the human condition or the process of socialization remains unknown.

For the most part, this causes people who feel dissonance to seek information that will reduce dissonance and avoid information that will increase dissonance. People who are involuntarily exposed to information that increases dissonance are likely to discount such information, by either ignoring it, misinterpreting it, or denying it.

The introduction of a new cognition or a "piece of knowledge" that is "dissonant" with a currently held cognition creates a state of "dissonance." The magnitude of which correlates to the relative importance of the involved cognitions. Dissonance can be reduced either by eliminating dissonant cognitions or by adding new consonant cognitions.It is usually found that when there is a discrepancy between an attitude and a behavior, it is more likely that the attitude will adjust itself to accomodate the behavior.

Qualifications of Festinger's Basic Theory

In 1965, Daryl Bem (1965; 1967) proposed the self-perception theory as an alternative to cognitive dissonance theory. This contends that people do not have inner access to their own attitudes and are therefore unable to determine whether or not they are in conflict. According to Bem, the inner workings Festinger's original study was the result of the participants inferring their attitudes from their behavior. Bem, whose self-perception theory was based largely on the behaviorism of B.F. Skinner, interpreted that those paid twenty dollars in the Festinger and Carlsmith study were unable to interpret their vocal behavior as an example of what behaviorists such as B.F. Skinner call "mands" - that is, elements of speech that are commands and demands rather than mere statements. Consequently, these people would have not perceived their vocal utterances as being directly tied to their behavior

Aronson (1969) challenged the basic theory by linking it to the self-concept. He believed that cognitive dissonance did not arise because people experienced dissonance between conflicting cognitions; rather, it surfaced when people saw their actions as conflicting with their self-concept. According to Aronson, people would not experience dissonance in their situation as long as their self-concept wasn't put into evaluation. In 1971, somewhat similar to Aronson, Tedeschi argued that maintaining cognitive consistency is a way to protect public self-image (Tedeschi, Schlenker & Bonoma, 1971).

Since, in many experimental situations of cognitive dissonance many of the findings seem to possess some similarity, it has been very difficult for social psychologists to design a conclusive experiment that will provide more evidence for one particular theory.

Cognitive Dissonance Research

Since its conception, experimenters have attempted to quantify cognitive dissonance. Several experimental methods have been used as evidence:

  • Induced Compliance Studies, wherein participants are asked to act in ways contrary to their attitudes;
  • Postdecisional studies, wherein the opinions of rejected alternatives after a decision are studied;
  • Historical examples that seem to illustrate the psychological phenomenon of cognitive dissonance.

Induced Compliance Studies

Origins and one of the first experiments testing the theory

In Festinger and Carlsmith's classic 1956 experiment, a prime example of an induced compliance study, students were made to perform tedious and meaningless tasks, consisting of turning pegs quarter-turns, removing them from a board, putting them back in, etc. Participants rated these tasks very negatively. After a long period of doing this, students were told the experiment was over and they could leave.

Before the participant left, the experimenter then asked a subject for a small favor. They were told that a needed research assistant since their's was unable to make it to the experiment. The participant was then asked to fill in and try to persuade another subject (who was actually an insider) that unfavorable tasks that the participant had just completed were interesting and engaging. The participants were sectioned into three groups. One group was paid $20 for the favor, another group was paid $1, and a control group was not offered any monetary award for the

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. Festinger and Carlsmith perceived this as evidence for cognitive dissonance. They theorized that when paid only $1, students had no other justification were therefore forced to internalize the attitude they were induced to express. It is argued that those in the $20 group, had an obvious external justification for their behavior.

The researchers further speculated that since the subjects in the $1 group faced insufficient justification that they sought to relieve their resulting stress by changing their attitude. This process allows the subject to genuinely believe that the tasks were enjoyable. Simply put, 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.

This study has been criticized, on the grounds that being paid twenty dollars may have aroused the suspicion of some participants. However, in the 1960s, experimenters used counter-attitudinal essay-writing, in which people were paid varying amounts of money (e.g. one or ten dollars) for writing essays expressing opinions contrary to their own. These studies also found support for dissonance theory.


Postdecisional Dissonance Studies

Jack Brehm's famous experiment observed housewives who after making a decision, tended to favor the alternatives which they had selected more strongly (Brehm, 1956). This can be explained in dissonance terms wherein a subject continues to wish for rejected alternatives that arouse dissonance between the cognitions, for example, the different between "I chose something else" and "I preferred that option".

The Phenomenon

Great Disappointment

The Great Disappointment refers to the early history of specific Christian denominations in the United States, which began when Jesus failed to reappear on the appointed day of October 22, 1844 as some Christians had to become to believe to be his "Second Coming."

William Miller

Between 1831 and 1844, a Baptist preacher by the name of William Miller, launched what has been called by historians as Second Great Awakening. Miller preached a set of fourteen rules for the interpretation of the Bible.[1] Based on his study of the prophecy of Daniel 8:14. Miller calculated that Jesus would return to Earth sometime between 21 March 1843 and 21 March 1844.[2] After the latter date came and went, the date was revised and set as October 22, 1844 based on the yearly Day of Atonement in Karaite Judaism.

When Jesus did not appear, Miller's followers experienced what would be coined as "the Great Disappointment". Many of the followers left the movement. A group of the remaining followers concluded that the prophecy did not predict that Jesus would return to earth in 1844, but that the investigative judgment in heaven would begin in that year.

Miller recorded his personal disappointment in his memoirs: "Were I to live my life over again, with the same evidence that I then had, to be honest with God and man, I should have to do as I have done. I confess my error, and acknowledge my disappointment."[3] Miller continued to wait for the Second Coming until his death in 1849.

The Great Disappointment is viewed as an example of how the psychological phenomenon of cognitive dissonance manifests itself through disconfirmed expectancies which often arise in a religious context.[2]

Repercussions

Seventh-day Adventists

When Seventh-day Adventist Church historians write about the morning of October 23 they refer to a vision said to have been received by Hiram Edson (1806-1882), an early Adventist. Edson claimed he had a vision that indicated the date predicted by Miller was correct. Further Bible study and visions led the early Seventh-day Adventists to believe that Christ went into the second apartment of the heavenly sanctuary in 1844 to begin the investigative judgment of both righteous and wicked in order to see who is worthy of going to heaven.[4] This investigative judgment is said to take place prior to his Second.

Charles Taze Russell and Jehovah's Witnesses

Jonas Wendell, an adventist preacher, experienced periods of weak faith after 1844. After studying the chronology of the Bible, he came to the conclusion that the Second Coming would be in 1868, and in 1870 published a booklet concluding it was to be in 1873.

Charles Taze Russell who was strongly influenced by Jonas Wendell predicted the Second Coming for 1874. One-time Millerite ministers George Storrs (1796-1879) and George Stetson proved to be a great assistance and guide to the development and growth of his worldwide ministry, the Bible Student movement. A schism in that movement occurred in 1933, where the leadership changed the date of the Second Coming to 1914. The main branch of that movement came to be known as the Jehovah's Witnesses, while many members refused the change; Bible Students today still hold that the Second Coming was in 1874.

Bahá'í

Members of the Bahá'í Faith believe that Miller's interpretation of signs and dates of the coming of Jesus were, for the most part, correct. They believe that the fulfillment of biblical prophecies of the coming of Christ were fulfilled by Báb, who declared himself as the Chosen One. Bab began openly teaching in Persia in October 1844 that he was the Promised One. Several Bahá'í books and pamphlets make mention of the Millerites and the prophecies used by Miller, most notably William Sears' Thief in the Night. [3]

Other References

The Fox and the Grapes Fable

The Fox and the Grapes is an Aesop fable. The protagonist, a fox, upon failing to find a way to reach grapes hanging high up on a vine, retreated and said, "The grapes are sour anyway!". The moral is stated at the end of the fable as:

It is easy to despise what you cannot get.

The English idiom "sour grapes", derived from this fable, refers to the denial of one's desire for something that one fails to acquire. Similar idioms exist in other languages as well. There is a similar Persian (Iranian) idiom: The cat can not reach the meat, says it smells bad!

From a psychological standpoint, this behavior is known as rationalization. It may also be called reduction of cognitive dissonance.Colloquially speaking, this idiom is often applied to someone who loses and fails to do so gracefully. Strictly speaking though, it should be applied to someone who, after losing, denies the intention to win altogether.

Frank Tashlin adapted the tale into a 1941 Color Rhapsodies short for Screen Gems/Columbia Pictures. The Fox and the Grapes marked the first appearance of Screen Gems' most popular characters, The Fox and the Crow.


References
ISBN links support NWE through referral fees

  • Aronson, E. (1969). The theory of cognitive dissonance: A current perspective. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.). Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, Volume 4, pp1-34. New York: Academic Press.
  • Bem, D.J. (1965). An experimental analysis of self-persuasion. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 1, 199-218
  • Bem, D.J. (1967). Self-perception: An alternative interpretation of cognitive dissonance phenomena. Psychological Review, 74, 183-200
  • Brehm, J. (1956). Post-decision changes in desirability of alternatives. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 52, 384-389
  • 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.
  • Stone, Jon R. (2000). Expecting Armageddon: Essential Readings in Failed Prophecy. Routledge. ISBN 041592331X.
  • Tedeschi, J.T., Schlenker, B.R. & Bonoma, T.V. (1971). Cognitive dissonance: Private ratiocination or public spectacle? American Psychologist, 26, 685-695

External links

Credits

New World Encyclopedia writers and editors rewrote and completed the Wikipedia article in accordance with New World Encyclopedia standards. This article abides by terms of the Creative Commons CC-by-sa 3.0 License (CC-by-sa), which may be used and disseminated with proper attribution. Credit is due under the terms of this license that can reference both the New World Encyclopedia contributors and the selfless volunteer contributors of the Wikimedia Foundation. To cite this article click here for a list of acceptable citing formats.The history of earlier contributions by wikipedians is accessible to researchers here:

The history of this article since it was imported to New World Encyclopedia:

Note: Some restrictions may apply to use of individual images which are separately licensed.

  1. ↑ Miller's Rules of Scriptural Interpretation
  2. ↑ Miller Mistakenly Set a Date for Christ's Return
  3. ↑ 3.0 3.1 William Sears Thief in the Night 1961 ISBN 085398008X George Ronald London
  4. ↑ 28 Fundamental SDA beliefs #24
Retrieved from https://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/p/index.php?title=Cognitive_dissonance&oldid=67823

Content is available under Creative Commons Attribution/Share-Alike License; additional terms may apply. See Terms of Use for details.
Copyright Logo
Powered by MediaWiki