Chapter 6 - Cognitive Dissonance

Why do we feel the need to justify our actions?

Because a lot of people want to be seen as:

• Rational

• Moral

• Smart

Cognitive dissonance according to Festinger

The discomfort that people feel when they behave in ways that threaten their self-esteem.

Cognitive dissonance according to Aronson

It is not just any kind of inconsistency that causes dissonance, but actions or beliefs that challenge our very sense of self-worth.

3 basic ways to reduce dissonance

• By changing our behavior to bring it in line with the dissonant cognition

• Attempt to justify our behavior through changing one of the dissonant cognitions

• Attempt to justify our behavior by adding new cognitions

Post-decision dissonance

Dissonance after making a decision, typically reduced by enhancing the attractiveness of the chosen alternative and devaluating the rejected alternatives.

The permanence of the decision

The more permanent and irrevocable the decisions, the stronger is the need to reduce dissonance. Usually taken advantage of by salespersons.

Lowballing

A strategy whereby a salesperson induces a customer to agree to purchase a product at a low cost, subsequently claims it was an error, and then raises the price.

Justification of effort

The tendency for individuals to increase their liking for something they have worked hard to attain.

External justification

A reason or an explanation for dissonant personal behavior that resides outside the individual.

Internal justification

The reduction of dissonance by changing something about oneself.

Counterattitudinal behavior

Acting in a way that runs counter to one’s private belief or attitude.

How to induce a person to change an attitude about things that matter?

NOT offering people large incentives to write a forceful essay supporting issues such as equal rights.

The Ben Franklin Effect

According to cognitive dissonance, we are attracted to someone not because that person is good to us, rather because we are good to them.

Justifying acts of cruelty

To reduce dissonance caused by harming someone, we fall into this “trap” where we consider this “victim” as deserving of the harm (dehumanizing).

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.

How does insufficient punishment occur?

• Small reward (internal justification) —> dissonance resulting in long-term internal change

• Large reward (external justification) —> no dissonance (“I did it for the money”)

The Hypocrisy Paradigm

Hypocrites judge others more harshly and present themselves as being more virtuous and ethical than everyone else, in order to reduce the dissonance of being guilty of ethical violations they condemn in others.

Hypocrisy induction

The arousal of dissonance by having individuals make statements that run counter to their behaviors and then reminding them of the inconsistency between what they advocated and their behavior.

Self-Affirmation Theory

The idea that people can reduce threats to their self-esteem by affirming themselves in areas unrelated to the source of the threat.

Self-evaluation maintenance theory

The idea that people experience dissonance when someone close to us outperforms us in an area that is central to our self-esteem.

How is this dissonance reduced?

• Become less close to the person

• Changing our behavior so that we now outperform them

• Deciding that the area is not that important to us after all

Narcissism

The combination of excessive self-love and a lack of empathy toward others.

Terror Management Theory

Self-esteem serves as a buffer, protecting people from terrifying thoughts about their own mortality.

How do people protect themselves from these thoughts?

By embracing cultural worldviews that make them feel like they are effective actors in a meaningful, purposeful world.