Respectable Challenges to Respectable Theory: Cognitive Dissonance Theory Requires Conceptualization Clarification and Operational Tools PMC

Indeed, at our knowledge, the existing studies examining the CDS are subject to the same methodological issues we raised previously, and the field lacks a reliable instrument to assess the CDS. The theory is based on the idea that two cognitions can be relevant or irrelevant to each other (Festinger, 1957). Such cognitions can be about behaviors, perceptions, attitudes, emotions, and beliefs. If the cognitions are relevant, they can be https://ecosoberhouse.com/article/how-long-does-a-hangover-last-how-to-ease-a-hangover-tips/ in agreement (consistent) or disagreement (inconsistent) with one another (Festinger, 1957). It has been used to explain and predict the motivational nature of dissonance that led to attitude and behaviour changes at both the individual and organisational level. Cognitive dissonance theory, proposed by Festinger, focuses on the discomfort felt when holding conflicting beliefs or attitudes, leading individuals to seek consistency.

• This research suggests that behavior inconsistent with one’s beliefs—if there is insufficient justification for the behaviour—will often bring about modification of those beliefs.
• They may alter their behavior in the short term, but as soon as the coercion is gone, the original behavior will reemerge.
• This means that whatever the induction and the specific setting of the theory, the general process could be the same.
• However, we should emphasize that this position is not yet consensual and most of the issues we raise are observable in the current publications of CDT.

Some studies also investigated moderators, such as income and product involvement (Gbadamosi, 2009), on consumer decision making. Dissonance can also be extended to other purchase phases, but its purposes will be different (Koller & Salzberger, 2009; Koller & Salzberger, 2012). In other words, an individual can reduce the mental discomfort by changing the inconsistent cognitions, reducing the importance of conflicting elements, acquiring new harmonious elements or increasing the importance of the existing consistent elements. Festinger used the case of a habitual smoker to demonstrate the theory (Festinger, 1962). A smoker who knows that smoking is bad for health will experience dissonance, which causes mental discomfort, because the habit of smoking and the knowledge of how harmful smoking is are conflicting. First, the person could remove the dissonant cognition by either changing his behaviour (stop smoking) or knowledge (believe that smoking is actually not bad for health).

The Right Operationalizations to Test the Theory

Firstly, the self-consistency model (Abelson, Aronson & McGuire, 1968; Aronson, 1999) addressed the paradox of the simplicity of the original theory by adding self-concept as a further explanation of dissonance. Secondly, the self-affirmation model (Berkowitz, 1988) focused on the overall self-image of moral and adaptive adequacy as an alternative explanation for attitude change. Lastly, the aversive consequences model (also commonly known as ”a new look at dissonance”) (Cooper & Fazio, 1984) also presented an alternative view on mental discomfort. This model proposed that the psychological stress was caused by the feeling of being self-responsible for inducing aversive consequences, rather than the inconsistency in cognitive elements.

Participants in the high-dissonance condition spread apart the alternatives significantly more than the participants in the other two conditions. If you took the job you would miss your loved ones; if you turned the job down, you would pine for the beautiful streams, mountains, and valleys. Life is filled with decisions, and decisions (as a general rule) arouse dissonance. When the participants were asked to evaluate the experiment, the participants who were paid only $1 rated the tedious task as more fun and enjoyable than the participants who were paid $20 to lie. They were then paid either $1 or $20 to tell a waiting participant (a confederate) that the tasks were really interesting.

A Very Human Answer to One of AI’s Deepest Dilemmas

In the current state, the general model of cognitive dissonance (inconsistency-CDS-regulation) has to be put to the test. This consideration could imply reexamining many former conclusions drawn in the first decades of CDT. All the information gathered from this examination could provide rich understanding for the theory and help in reconnecting the CDT to the whole field. In this context, does CDT needs to worry about its future and could it be reclassified from major league to classic-but-wrong-theory? Until now, replication projects have not yet focused on CDT and have spared this theory. We did definitely learn a lot from the six decades of existence of CDT and it influenced many fields and theoretical descendants (e.g., Aronson, 1992; Harmon-Jones and Mills, 1999; Gawronski and Strack, 2012).

Although there are several varieties of these theories, most have in common the idea that human behaviour is at least partially motivated by a need to become as much as one can possibly become. One example of this approach is the self-actualization theory of Abraham Maslow previously mentioned. Changing the conflicting cognition is one of the most effective ways of dealing with dissonance but it is also one of the most difficult—particularly in the case cognitive dissonance and addiction of deeply held values and beliefs, such as religious or political leanings. A person who cares about their health might be disturbed to learn that sitting for long periods during the day is linked to a shortened lifespan. Since they work all day in an office and spend a great deal of time sitting, it is difficult to change their behavior. Among them are how highly a particular belief is valued and the degree to which the beliefs are inconsistent.

Psychology

As lower-level needs are met, the motivation to meet the higher-level needs becomes active. Furthermore, as an individual progresses upward, it becomes progressively more difficult to successfully fulfill the needs of each higher level. For this reason Maslow believed that very few people actually reach the level of self-actualization, and it is a lifelong process for the few who do. Cognitive dissonance can even influence how people feel about and view themselves, leading to negative feelings of self-esteem and self-worth.