Cognitive dissonance

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 the mid-1950s after observing the counterintuitive persistence of members of a UFO doomsday cult and their increased proselytization after the leader's prophecy failed to materialize. The failed message of earth's destruction, sent by aliens to a suburban housewife, 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.

Experimental Methods for 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 experimental testing the theory

In Festinger and Merrill 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 participants 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, even engaging. The participants were sectioned into two groups. One group was paid $20 for the favor and the other was paid $1.

When asked to rate the peg-turning tasks later, those in the $1 group rated them more positively than those in the $20 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 cognitive 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".

Historical Examples of 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 Second Coming by 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. Based on his study of the prophecy, Miller calculated that Jesus would return to Earth sometime between the 21st of March 1843 and 21st of March 1844.

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." Miller continued to wait for the Second Coming until his death in 1849. Despite these disappointments however, subsequent leaders and historians would adopt other theories or explanation for the Second Great Awakening. 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]

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. This investigative judgment is said to take place prior to his Second Coming.

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 or 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 assert that the Second Coming was in 1874.

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 classified 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.

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.

Criticisms

While a highly established theory, cognitive dissonance is not without its share of criticisms. In 1964, Chapanis and Chapanis began to find methodological ambiguities in classic cognitive dissonance studies. A year later, in 1965, Rosenburg suggested that in many of the experiments that the participants may feel as though their sincerity and integrity are being tested. And this, according to Rosenburg, may produce results consistent with cognitive dissonance theory but are in reality the result of subject's conception that they are being evaluated. These criticisms and contributions to cognitive dissonance theory have encouraged experiments that are more soundly designed.

Applications to the Theory

Cognitive dissonance has innumerable applications to our everyday lives. It is observable in consumerism, as a person makes a choice to buy one product over the other. The bad features of the chosen product and the good features of the unchosen product will result in dissonance. The consumer, in order to lessen the discomfort of these conflicting cognitions, will change their cognitions, alter the importance of said cognitions, or create new cognitions.

There is also something known as buyer's remorse. From a marketing standpoint, this theory contends that a consumer may use a particular product because they believe it to be the most effective of its kind. But, when a consumer sees a competitor's advertisement and believes that this particular product is better than the one that they are using. As a result, this creates cognitive dissonance and as a result, the consumer buys the product that they believe to be more effective.

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

• Introduction at ithaca.edu
• Introduction to Cognitive Dissonance: Progress on a Pivotal Theory in Social Psychology
• Paper: Cognitive dissonance in decision making
• Festinger and Carlsmith's original paper
• 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)
• Story with pictures from umass.edu

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:

• Cognitive_dissonance  ^history
• Great_Disappointment  ^history
• The_Fox_and_the_Grapes  ^history

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

• History of "Cognitive dissonance"

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