6 Cognitive Dissonance

consonance

"I believe safety is important and I always wear a helmet when biking"; two consistent cognitions

dissonance

"I believe safety is important and I rarely wear a helmet when biking"; two conflicting cognitions

irrelevance

"I believe safety is important, and I like rom coms"

bad deeds - hating our victims

"There's nothing people can't contrive to praise or condemn and find justification for doing so." - Moliere, The Misanthrope = If we harm someone, this induces dissonance between our action and our self-concept as a decent person. To resolve this dissonance, we may derogate (disparage - look down on) our victim.

Three basic ways to reduce dissonance

(1) Change our behavior to bring it in line with the dissonant cognition (2) Change one of the cognitions to make it less dissonant (3) Add new cognitions that are consonant with the behavior (aka its okay i tan because i only do it in the summer); 2 and 3 are ways in which we justify or rationalize our behavior

More bad deeds - hating our victims studies

(1) Davis and Jones - Induced students to insult a confederate to his face. After doing so (but not before), they found him less attractive. *Implications* - once we engage in a negative act, we will attempt to rationalize our behavior (2) Bersheid, Boye, Walster - Had participants deliver a shock to a confederate who would or would not have a chance to retaliate. Only those "victims" who could not retaliate were derogated. *Implications* - prisoners can't retaliate, more likely to be derogated/dehumanized (e.g., Abu Ghraib)

Cognitive dissonance paradigms

(1) Postdecision dissonance (2) Justification of effort (3) Insufficient justification (4) Insufficient Punishment (5) Good and bad deeds

Basic tenets of dissonance theory

(1) any two cognitions are either relevant or not (2) If relevant, they can be dissonant or consonant (3) dissonance causes negative arousal (4) people will be motivated to reduce this arousal

Insufficient justification flow chart

(1) counterattitudinal advocacy (state publicaly an attitude that runs counter to your own -->> (2) experience cognitive dissonance -->> (3) External justification? if yes, move directly to step 5 (no attitude/behavior change needed), if no, insufficient justification - move to step 4 -->> (4) Internal Justification - change attitude or behavior -->> (5) Dissonance resolved!

The power of insufficient justification and insufficient punishment

(1) large reward or severe punishment -->> external justification -->> temporary change VS (2) small reward or mild punishment -->> internal justification -->> lasting change

Theory of Cognitive Dissonance

(Leon Festinger) inconsistency between any two cognitions; produces discomfort; people are motivated to reduce this discomfort

Cheating study on Postdecision dissonance

- Measured 6th graders attitudes towards cheating - Made it easy for them to cheat on exam - Observed who cheated (vs. not) - Children who cheated showed a more lenient attitude toward cheating (than before they cheated) - Children who did not cheat showed a harsher attitude toward cheating (than before they did not cheat) - Again, this shows "spreading of alternatives" due to postdecision dissonance

More on Dissonance

- The attempt to reduce dissonance can prevent us from learning from our mistakes. - Dissonance is uncomfortable and it is relatively easy to rationalize our behavior. - However, it is important to stop and think before we rationalize so that we can learn from our mistakes

Zimbardo et al. Grasshopper study - insufficient punishment

Army reservists were asked to eat fried grasshoppers. Asked by a stern, unpleasant officer or a well-liked, pleasant one. Results: (1) Pleasant officer - liked grasshoppers better ▪ Lacked external justification, had to change attitude (2) Stern officer - liked grasshoppers less ▪ Had external justification, did it to please the officer, no attitude change

insufficient punishment - forbidden toy study

Children were asked to rate attractiveness of several toys. Experimenter chose a toy the child really liked and told the child they were not allowed to play with it. Children were threatened with mild or severe punishment (random assignment to condition). Experimenter left the room for a few minutes. Experimenter returned and asked children to rate toys again

Results of insufficient justification study - AIDS speech

Found that hypocrisy group had highest % of participants who bought condoms (had highest dissonance), then mindful-only > information-only > commitment-only

results of forbidden toy study

None of the children played with the forbidden toy while the experimenter was gone. But, they found a difference between the groups. If children were threatened with severe punishment, attitudes did not change (still liked the toy the same or more). If children were threatened with mild punishment, attitudes toward the toy changed (liked the toy less) = Insufficient punishment! ▪ "I did not play with the toy, but the punishment wouldn't have been that bad. I must not really like the toy."

Other insufficient justification study - AIDS speech

Participants (college students) were asked to compose a speech describing dangers of AIDS and advocating condom use. Two groups: Group 1 - composed the arguments, Group 2 - composed the arguments and read them in front of a video camera (to be watched later by high school students); In addition, half of the participants from each group were reminded of their own failure to use condoms; 4 groups total... (1)Hypocrisy - composed arguments & read in front of camera, reminded of own failures (2) Commitment-only - composed arguments & read in front of camera (3) Mindful-only - composed arguments, reminded of own failures (4) Information-only - composed arguments

Good deeds study: intellectual contest

Students participated in an intellectual contest that enabled them to win a substantial sum of money Three conditions: - Experimenter asked them to return money as favor to experimenter - Secretary asked them to return money as favor to psychology department - Not asked to return money (control group) Participants were then given an opportunity to rate the experimenter RESULTS: Doing a favor for the experimenter caused participant to have highest liking of experiment; doing a favor for psychology department caused participants to like experiment less than control group

Examples of bad deeds - hating our victims

There are many examples of this in the real world: - Holocaust - economic struggles, blame Jewish people, see them as less than human - Vietnam War - "those aren't people; those are Vietnamese" - Abu Ghraib - fear of terrorism, dehumanization, unfair treatment of prisoners (torture)

5. Good deeds - the Ben Franklin Effect

We like people not for the favors they have done us but for the favors we have done them - Ben Franklin used this strategy to manipulate a political rival to become a friend by asking him for favors: "He that has once done you a kindness will be more ready to do you another than he whom you yourself have obliged" (Franklin,1868/1900).

ex. of cognitive dissonance

You believe eating lots of fruits and vegetables contributes to go health, but you don't eat many fruits and vegetables

harsh

__ punishments teach us to avoid getting caught

external justification

a reason or an explanation for dissonant personal behavior that resides outside the individual (ex. reward or punishment), attitude/behavior doesn't change though!

Initiation study about justification of effort

college students volunteered to join a group; before joining the group, they had to go through an initiation that was either: severe, mild, no initiation (control group); everybody listened to a taped discussion from the "group" that was really dull and boring; then, participants were asked to rate the group based on the discussion; AS severity of initiation increases, the liking for the discussion group also increases (rapid increase for severe initiation); Cognition #1: I didn't want to talk about my sex life, Cognition #2: I did talk about my sex life, Dissonance Reduction: It was worth it in the end

Insufficient justification study

complete boring tasks for an hour, tell the next subject that the task was fun, receive either $1 or $20 for participation; Those receiving $20 had a more unfavorable attitude toward the task (high justification - low dissonance), those given $1 had a much higher attitude toward the task (low justification - high dissonance); cognition #1: the tasks were boring, cognition #2: I said the tasks were fun, dissonance reduction: the tasks were enjoyable

dissonance reduction

devaluing the forbidden activity or object: ""I am not doing it, but I would only receive a mild punishment if I did. I must not really want to do it after all!"

(1) Postdecision dissonance

dissonance aroused after making a decision; typically reduced by enhancing the attractiveness of the chosen alternative and devaluating the rejected alternative; aka we like the chosen object or action more, we like the rejected objects or actions less, so this makes us feel better!

Cognitive dissonance flow chart

going about your day as usual . . . -> some action leads to inconsistent cognitions (could be a behavior that conflicts with your self-image) -> experience cognitive dissonance -> motivation to reduce dissonance kicks in -> attempt to reduce dissonance (change behavior, change cognition, or add consonant cognitions) -> dissonance is reduced or eliminated

dissonance

insufficient (mild) punishment induces(causes) ____ . "Only a mild punishment? Why am I not doing this action?"

3. Insufficient Justification

made up of counterattitudinal advocacy, external justification, and internal justification

Study on Post-decision dissonance

rated household items and chose one; choice was either easy (one clearly better than another) or difficult; rated items again after choice - for easy choice, liking for object didn't change, but for hard choice - unchosen item less liked and chosen item more liked (*spreading of alternatives*); Cognition #1: I like the iron, Cognition #2: I chose the blender, Dissonance Reduction: the blender is a lot better

counterattitudinal advocacy

stating an opinion or attitude that runs counter to one's private belief or attitude

4. Insufficient Punishment

the dissonance aroused when individuals lack sufficient external justification for having resisted a desired activity or object, usually resulting in individuals' devaluing the forbidden activity or object; Similar to insufficient justification, but here we are talking about punishment not reward

internal justification

the reduction of dissonance by changing something about oneself (eg. attitude or behavior); forced to change attitude/behavior

(2) Justification of Effort

the tendency for individuals to increase their liking for something they have worked hard to attain; ex. if you work really hard to get into med school, you might be less likely to admit that you actually don't think you want to be a doctor anymore - "I worked really hard for this, so it must be worth it!

Results of insufficient justification study

those with the smaller incentive convinced themselves that the study was actually fun (dissonance was present); those recieving $20 didn't feel cognitive dissonance since they thought it was worth - they didn't change their opinion