Cognitive Dissonance
How do human beings make decisions? What
triggers a person to take action at any
given point? These are allquestions
that I will attempt to answer with my
theoretical research into Leon
Festinger’s theory of cognitive dissonance, as
well as many of the other
related theories. We often do not realize the
psychological events that take
place in our everyday lives. It is important to
take notice of theories, such
as the balance theory, the congruency theory and
the cognitive dissonance
theory so that one’s self-persuasion occurs
knowingly. As psychologist and
theorist gain a better understanding of
Festinger’s cognitive dissonance
theory manipulation could occur more easily
than it already does in today’s
society. Leon Festinger’s cognitive
dissonance theory is very closely related
to many of the consistency theories.
The first of the major consistency
theories, the balance theory, was proposed by
Fritz Heider (1946, 1958)
and was later revised by Theodore Newcomb (1953)
(Larson, 1995). Heider and
Newcomb’s theory was mostly looking at the
interaction between two people
(interpersonally) and the conflicts that arose
between them. When two people
have conflicting opinions or tension is felt
between another person, it is
more likely persuasion will occur. Because if no
tension was felt between the
two parties, or there were no conflicting opinions
there would be no need to
persuade each other. If you think about it persuasion
occurs only because
there is tension between two facts, ideas or people. Charles
Larson
writes in his book, Persuasion, Reception and Responsibility,
"another
approach to the consistency theory is congruency theory, by Charles
Osgood and
Percy Tennenbaum (1955)" (p.82). This theory suggest that we
want to have
balance in our lives and there is a systematic way to
numerically figure it out.
When two attitudes collide we must strive to
strike a balance between the two
attitudes. The balance varies depending on
the intensity we feel about each
attitude and our pre-disposed positions
concerning the attitude. We either have
a favorable , neutral or unfavorable
opinion concerning ideas. When two
attitudes collide we will attempt to
downgrade the favorable position and
upgrade the unfavorable position so that
we feel a balance. For example, suppose
someone thought of Mel Gibson as a
good role model. Later on they come to find
out Mel Gibson does not like
football. If the person was to like both football
and Mel Gibson one of three
things would happen: 1) The individual would
downgrade their opinion of Mel
Gibson, or 2)downgrade football, or 3) downgrade
both. The action taken would
create psychological consistency in one’s mind.
These theories are very
interesting and have been quite researched, but none
more so than Leon
Festinger’s theory of cognitivedissonance. Leon
Festinger’s theory,
unlike the others I have described, deal with quantitative
aspects, as well
as qualitative. That’s what is so different and revolutionary
about
Festinger’s theory. Robert Wicklund and Jack Brehm (1976), in their
book
Perspectives on Cognitive Dissonance, write," Most notably, the
original
statement of dissonance theory include: propositions about
the
resistance-to-change of cognitions and about the proportion of cognitions
that
are dissonant, both of which allowed powerful and innovative analyses
of
psychological situations (p.1). The term "dissonance" refers to the
relation
between two elements. When two elements do not fit together they are
considered
dissonant. Cognitive dissonance can be broken down into a number
of elements. As
Brehm and Cohen (1962) write, "A dissonant relationship
exist between two
cognitive elements when a person possesses one which
follows the obverse of
another that he possesses. A person experiences
dissonance, that is, a
motivational tension, when he (or she) has cognitions
among which there are one
or more dissonant relationships" (p.4).Cognitive
dissonance can occur
intrapersonally as well as betweentwo or more people.
With individual cognitive
dissonance the individual longs for consistency
within their own mind. Second,
there exist dissonance between two or more
people. This occurs when two people
have differing opinions about a
particular issue.This phenomenon may have
something to do with varying
degrees of knowledge about the issue or different
belief systems being
enacted. An example of this can be seen by taking a look at
the cultures of
the West versus cultures of the East. Cultures of the East value
loyalty and
honor. Cultures of the West have different value systems that often
collide
with those of the East. Between two parties, dissonance may arise from:
(1)
logical inconsistency; (2) because of cultural mores: (3) because of
a
specific opinion; and (4) because of past experience. To reduce
cognitive
dissonance a person can either reduce the dissonant cognition, or
its relative
importance can be reduced (Wicklund and Brehm, 1976, p.5).
Although the theory
assumes that dissonance will be eliminated or reduced,
only the thought about
taking action to do so is a given. The means employed
by any given individual to
meet these ends is still open to speculation.
Action taken depends solely on the
many variables involved, such as ego
involvement, commitment, past experiences
and so on. We all react differently
to dissonant cognitions that we are
confronted with. My research attempts to
examine the different reactions that
people have had to different opinions I
have declared which involve them
heavily. The area I have chosen to look at
is the habits which many of my close
friends engage in: smoking. This is
often a difficult topic to discuss because
it is an addictive habit and very
personal to many people. Full well knowing
these facts, I attempted to delve
in the minds of my friends and put many of the
theories afore mentioned to
use in the practical world. To undertake my research
project I observed my
friends in their everyday routines. I chose to attempt to
persuade many of my
friends to stop smoking. While attempting to undertake this
momentous task I
observed many of the consistency theories, especially
Festinger’s theory
of cognitive-dissonance. The research method that was used
was first hand
observation. You could say that I was undertaking a form of
ethnographic
research. Most of the time I had to become an active member of the
persuasion
process, or the subject of smoking possibly might not have been
talked about.
The context I chose was that of my friends at home. All of the
participants
in the study did not know I was logging their behavior for later
use in this
research paper. Either myself and/or my friends would be active
participants
in the persuasion process. The basic premise of the
cognitive-dissonance
theory is that when two pieces of information do not follow
each other we
will experience some form of psychological tension, which we will
attempt to
reduce in some way. Often times, according to Leon Festinger, people
attempt
to reduce cognitive dissonance whenever possible (Gleitman, 1983,
p.12).
I noticed many times that my friends were very interested in the
topic of
quitting their habit, and some at times took the issue personally.
When people
are personally involved with an issue, much like the use of
tobacco, they are
much more attentive to the issue (Petty & Cacioppo,
1981, p. 847). For
example, on 3/31/96 I told my three friends that I was
concerned about how much
they had been smoking recently. On the average they
are smoking 20 cigarettes a
day. One of the girls immediately retaliated with
the statement that " her
grandmother smoked for nearly all of her life and
she is in good health." In
this particular instance we can see the
basicpremise of the consistency theories
at work. The girl who said this
statement likes me. She also enjoys smoking.
When I made the statement
that I was concerned with the levels of tobacco
consumption she disregarded
my opinion by using past experiences as evidence to
back her point. She is a
friend so I assume she somewhat values my opinion, but
she upgraded her
opinion of smoking and downgraded my opinion. She experienced
some form of
dissonance when I stated my opinion. She reduced her dissonance and
thus was
in balance. This is where Festinger’s theory of cognitive dissonance
attempts
to rationalize her behavior. The other consistency theories do not
recognize
the degree to which the dissonance exist. If you were to not
use
Festinger’s model, most likely you would have assumed that my opinion
would
have changed her attitude and actions. After all, I did have a
contradictory
opinion that did not follow hers, and dissonance was felt.
That’s what is
missing from the balance theory and the congruency theory:
"latitudes of
attitude". This theory, unlike many others, must factor in the
human psyche as
a variable. The persuasion process did not occur in this case
because my friends
attitude towards not smoking was so anti-quitting, that it
might be impossible
to change. You cannot think of this theory in regards to
machines you must look
at it from the human perspective. Another example of
observable
cognitive-dissonance occurred on 4/7/96. The same three friends
and myself were
watching television. An anti-smoking campaign sponsored by
the American Red
Cross came on the television. Various facts about the
amount of people that die
every year from smoking and statistics about the
amount of Americans with lung
cancer were shared. I asked the girls what they
thought about the information.
They all agreed that it could happen to
them, but they hoped it did not. In this
case, I believe dissonance was
created by exposure to information. The girls did
not like the information
and downplayed its validity. Not one of the girls stood
up and said, "I am
going to quit smoking today, I am really at risk of getting
lung cancer!"
Once again personal involvement was a given, and once again no
action was
taken. The girls feel to strong about smoking and refuse to quit. We
must ask
ourselves what a solution to this problem could be? Why is it that
smokers,
in the face of grave danger, refuse to reduce dissonance by acting out
their
urge to quit smoking? The cognitive-dissonance theory is a part of
our
everyday lives, whether we realize it or not. When we are presented with
view
points or opinions that differ from our own often times we feel
dissonance. We,
as human beings, are always striving to keep our lives in
balance. Often a
balance in our psyche requires that we not heed the warnings
of things to come.
As I have shown, cognitive-dissonance is utilized to
avoid taking action. As
many theorist have stated cognitive dissonance does
create an internal conflict
that causes someone to take action. In the case
of smokers, I must regrettably
report that smoking is vary rarely avoided,
even with dissonance in full effect.
Smokers, when presented with hard
core data showing a decline in health due to
smoking, refuse to head warning.
This is evident with all of the"guaranteed" products to help people stop
smoking. First there was "The
Patch" and now the consumers are intrigued
with products, such as Niccorrest
Gum. Apparently no matter how much
dissonance is felt and to what degree it is
felt does not matter. Therefore,
it may not be possible to get rid of dissonance
or even to reduce it
materially by changing one’s behavior or feeling. The
research I have
conducted supports my claim that it is nearly impossible to
change the
actions of smokers even though massive amounts of cognitive
dissonance are
felt. I believe that many of the people being observed reduced th
overall
magnitude of dissonance by adding new cognitive elements. No matter how
much
dissonance is felt, the smoker will always find elements that are
consonant
(agreeable) with the fact of smoking. The will power of individuals
feeling as
though they have to have smoking in their everyday lives is, often
times, far to
powerful for dissonance to overcome Perhaps research such as
mine can be useful
to further research into the area of dissonance and the
use of tobacco. Much
work still needs to be done in this area. We see so many
people dying from lung
cancer. Something must be done Perhaps looking at
effective methods of
treatment.
Bibliography
Bender, David, and
Bruno, Leone.(Ed.) (1991). Cognitive Dissonance: Opposing
viewpoints. San
Diego: Greenhaven Press, Inc. Wolf, Robert. (1997). Cognitive
Dissonance
Treatment. Philadelphia: Chelsea House Publishers. Baird, Robert,
and
Rosenbaum, Stuart. (Ed.) (1995). The Current Debate. New York:
Prometheus Books.
Steins, Richard. (1993). Is It Justice?. New York:
Twenty-First Century Books.
Jacobs, Nancy. E.D. (Ed.) (1996) Cruel And
Unusual Treatment?. Texas:
Information Plus. McCafferty, James. (1974).
Cognitive Dissonance. New York.
Lieber-Atherton. Josephson, Matthew.
(1997). Discrimination and Cognitive
Dissonance. New York: McGraw-Hill
Book Company. McCartney, K. (1998).
"Choosing life or Death."
Developmental Psychology, 20, 113-119. Hand, D.
(1998). Treatment: How Well
Does it Work. Chicago: The University of Chicago
Press. Rilke, Richard.
Home Page. 18 Feb. 1999
Walker, Davis, and Tristar Home Video. (1995).
Living with the Helpless.
[Videotape]. Burbank CA: Tristar Home Video.