Dissonance explains what happens to people who agonize over a difficult decision, whether it is a simple purchase or a major life decision, and then after the decision express more positive views of the chosen option, and more negative views of the nonchosen option. This is referred to as the ‘spreading of alternatives,’ and it occurs because the negative attributes of the chosen option and the positive attributes of the option not chosen are dissonant with the behavior of the choice that was made. Another example of dissonance occurs when people who are humiliated during an initiation to join a group like a fraternity or the armed forces, end up liking these groups more than if there was no hazing. As going through humiliation to join a group is dissonant with any negative aspects of the group, the attitude toward the group is changed to be more positive. This is referred to as ‘effort justification’ because the attitude change results from having to justify to the self the willingness to go through so much to join the group. These are just two examples of the paradoxical consequences of dissonance for persuasion (see the dissonance entry for more in-depth discussion).

Read on to learn more about cognitive dissonance, including examples, signs a person might be experiencing it, causes, and how to resolve it. By using these types of explanations, the smoker is able to reduce the dissonance and continue the unhealthy behavior. People like to believe that they are logical, consistent, and good at making decisions. Cognitive dissonance can interfere with the perceptions they hold about themselves and their abilities, which is why it can often feel so uncomfortable and unpleasant. Understanding our mechanisms with which we reduce dissonance and recognizing when it occurs are key to making informed and constructive decisions.

How Attitude Change Takes Place

A classic dissonance experiment by Aronson and Mills (1959) demonstrates the basic idea. Brehm (1956) was the first to investigate the relationship between dissonance and decision-making. Life is filled with decisions, and decisions (as a general rule) arouse dissonance. Saul Mcleod, Ph.D., is a qualified psychology teacher with over 18 years experience of working in further and higher education.

This difference between the two studies may be due to the difference between experimental paradigms (or timing of brain scans). In van Veen’s study, participants expressed their counterattitudinal opinions during the scanning, and therefore, the participants had no explicit opportunity to reduce their felt dissonance during this task. In contrast, in the Izuma study, during the second rating task, participants perceived the discrepancy between their preference and past choice behaviors, while rating their preference for each item again. Thus, they had an opportunity to reduce cognitive dissonance by reporting their new preference.

Averse consequences vs. inconsistency

Being paid only $1 is not sufficient incentive for lying and so those who were paid $1 experienced dissonance. They could only overcome that dissonance by coming https://ecosoberhouse.com/ to believe that the tasks really were interesting and enjoyable. Being paid $20 provides a reason for turning pegs, and there is, therefore, no dissonance.

It occurs in all of us frequently, not just when planning to diet and justifying a doughnut with a delayed diet start. Cognitive dissonance theory itself suggests that if patients are investing time, money, and emotional effort in the therapy, they will be likely to work hard to reach their therapeutic goals in order to justify their efforts. Cognitive dissonance was measured indirectly by asking participants about changes in their opinion about how enjoyable the task was following the experiment.

Induce effort

Fourth, in these experiments, dissonance may have been produced in the no-aversive consequences conditions, but may have been reduced by a route other than attitude change. At the conclusion of the study, subjects were asked to rate the tedious tasks. The subjects paid one dollar ($1) rated the tasks more cognitive dissonance treatment positively than did the subjects in the twenty-dollar ($20) or control groups. The subjects in the paid groups experienced dissonance due to inconsistencies between their attitudes and behavior. The subjects’ believed the tasks to be boring, but they told the confederate that the tasks were interesting.

• This is often very difficult, as people frequently employ a variety of mental maneuvers.
• The theory is different compared to other consistency theories as it defines dissonance and consonance in relation to a specific cognition, which usually is related to a behaviour (Harmon-Jones & Harmon-Jones, 2007).
• There is also some ambiguity (i.e., vagueness) about the term “dissonance” itself.
• Cognitive dissonance theory, which was founded by American social psychologist Leon Festinger in 1957, states that cognitive dissonance drives people to resolve the conflict between truths and behaviors that don’t match one another.
• After about a half century of the development of the theory, several authors have published condensed works and state-of-the-art pieces concerning the topic, but they often suggest a partially deviant point of view.
• Although the concepts of harmony and conflict were not new and had been proposed earlier by Heider (Heider, 1946), Cognitive Dissonance theory made a major contribution to the concept of consistency (Cooper, 2007).

Lastly, the person could focus on the benefits of smoking as an important part of his or her life (Mills & Harmon-Jones, 1999). Although both van Veen et al. (2009) and Izuma et al. (2010) commonly found pMFC activation in response to cognitive dissonance, the two studies report somewhat different activations in other areas. Notably, van Veen found reliable anterior insula activations, but relatively small DPLFC activations. On the other hand, Izuma reported extensive bilateral DLPFC activations, but anterior insula activation was found only after lowering the statistical threshold.

Cognitive Dissonance Theory: A review

With dissonance that results from wanting something we can’t have, there are things we would like to have that we cannot for any number of reasons. When the desired “something” is very important, we may have dissonant cognitions that make us tense and unhappy. Facing truths or changing an unhealthy habit might be uncomfortable, but resolving this discomfort can create positive changes.

Sometimes learning new information can lead to feelings of cognitive dissonance. For example, if you engage in a behavior that you later learn is harmful, it can lead to feelings of discomfort. People sometimes deal with this by finding ways to justify their behaviors or findings ways to discredit or ignore new information. (a) pMFC area activated by cognitive dissonance in the ‘induced compliance’ paradigm. (b) pMFC area activated by cognitive dissonance in the ‘free-choice’ paradigm.

In response to the limitations of the theory, three revisions of cognitive dissonance theory have been proposed. 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.

Cognitive dissonance theory began by postulating that pairs of cognitions can be either relevant or irrelevant to one another. However, if two cognitions are relevant, but conflicting, the existence of dissonance would cause psychological discomfort and motivate the individual to act upon this. The greater the magnitude of dissonance, the greater the pressure for the individual to reduce the dissonance (Harmon-Jones & Mills, 2019). The existence of dissonance and the mechanisms that humans used to cope with it captured Festinger’s interest in developing cognitive dissonance theory. Cognitive approaches to motivation focus on how a person’s motivation is influenced by their cognitions or mental processes. Cognitive dissonance occurs when a person experiences conflict, contradiction, or inconsistency in their cognitions.