|
|
self justificationThe key element is that we self justify to reduce cognitive dissonance.
We want to appear logical and consistent rather than irrational beings
We constantly make up explanations for our behavior, regardless of their accuracy.
Aronson says that we are rationalizing not rational beings.
Cognitive Dissonance First proposed by Leon Festinger 1958
Original definition: a state of tension that occurs whenever an individual simultaneously holds 2 cognitions that are psychologically inconsistent
Tension is unpleasant and thus, we are motivated to reduce it
How? Change one or both cognitions or add more cognitions that help bridge the gap between the original two cognitions
Some examples of how this works
In 1964 Surgeon General released report that clarified exactly how bad cigarettes are for you
Only 10% of non-smokers disagreed with the report’s findings; 40% of heavy smokers
A person from North Carolina explains his reasons for smoking as aiding in the local economy
Eminem and Elton John - we do not process information in an unbiased manner. Purchasing via a credible source. Appliance study (Brehm)
Further, self-definition of how heavy a smoker one is, is influenced by awareness of risk
General Implications include zero Sum equations: All or none thinking. Vow to lose weight meet our goal. This causes dissonance, so we reduce our commitment.
Very difficult to change deep seated attitudes. Persuasive message leads to dissonance. Easiest way to reduce diss. is to reject the message or distort the evidence. Kill the messenger
We will distort the objective world in order to reduce dissonance
Irrational, yes. Yet, try to view it as an ego-defensive behavior. It makes us feel better. In debates, we remember the plausible arguments that agree with our position and the implausible arguments agreeing with the opposing position.
Dissonance is a consequence of making a decision
Dissonance arises when choosing between 2 equally attractive alternatives. After our choice has been made we reduce dissonance through confirmation bias
Brehm “Participants rate two gifts as equally desirable. Give participants choice of 1 of these 2 gifts. Immediately after, chosen gift is now evaluated as more attractive.
Real Life Consequences
Decisions in Vietnam. Numerous tactical decisions ran contrary to the facts.
Decisions were made that were in-line (consonant) with previous decisions.
e.g., if we stop bombing now, that suggests that it was a bad decision originally.
On a personal level good=honor=duty=kill=bad
War in Iraq : support the soldiers not the War. Kerry’s decision to support the war given faulty information. Bush declaring that Kerry supported the war and now does not tries to cast doubt onto Kerry creating dissonance in voters.
Foot in the Door Phenomenon - use small favors to encourage people to accede to larger requestse.g., wearing a pink ribbon for a day doubles subsequent donation rate
Benjamin Franklin effect – “if you want to get someone to like you ask to borrow a book.”
Importance of Irrevocability
Knox and Inkster demonstrated that dissonance does not occur until a decision is irrevocable. People who had already placed their horse racing bets were much more certain of winning than those on the way to place their bets.
Immoral Behavior Judson Mills – investigated 6th graders reactions to cheating. Conducted a pre-test. Then provided an opportunity for some to cheat.
Those who had cheated adopted more lenient opinions toward cheating.
Those who had resisted adopted a harsher attitude.
Suggests that the harshest opponents of some positions may be those who were tempted toward that position at one time.
Inadequate Justification
If we have adequate external justification for our actions CDissonance does not occur. In additon an Attitude change is unlikely to occur
External justification includes: large rewards, politeness, drunkenness, admiration
Educational Implications
Mark Lepper: children who play with a puzzle in order to gain a greater reward are much less likely to spontaneously play with that toy in the future
Can explain previous effort on the puzzle in terms of external justification, not enjoyment.
Use Swimmers and the duck of the Day
Child Rearing Implications
If we want the child to internalize an attitude, severe punishment may not be effective
Severe punishment = external justification (e.g., I am doing this because my hide will be tanned otherwise, not because I want to)
Aronson and Carlsmith: mild threat and toy choice Children who received a mild threat were much less likely to choose that toy in the future than were those exposed to a severe threat (e.g., forbidden fruit)
Festinger and Carlsmith: had students complete a very boring task over the course of an hour. Then, they were asked to lie by telling the next group of participants that the task was interesting and enjoyable. Those paid $20 for the experiment rated the activity as dull. Those paid $1 rated the task as enjoyable
Saying is believing
Update of the Theory
Aronson argues that dissonance is tied to the self-concept: we want to appear good and honest Research supports this and leads to the following principle: dissonance effects are greatest when: 1. People feel personally responsible for their actions 2. Their actions have serious consequences
Justification of Effort
Hard work makes goal more desirable. We must justify the effort and pain.
e.g., this fraternity is great, otherwise why would I drink to the point of puking?
Aronson and Mills: initiation difficulty and enjoyment of boring discussion
Those who suffered a severe initiation found a dull discussion much more rewarding than those who had an easier initiation
Psychology of Inevitability
We have an amazing capacity to minimize horrible but inevitable fortunes.
“could be worse, could be raining” phenomenon. children who knew they would have to eat a disliked vegetable in the future gained a more positive attitude about the vegetable In the short-term this is a great defense mechanism
But, can be catastrophic in the long run (e.g., earthquake preparation in CA, our fear of death [lack of wills and preparation] and reasons why people don’t vote. Generational fears: older folks afraid of death and cars, Gen x and Y afraid fo Nuclear attack)
Alternative Explanation for these Effects
Daryl Bem and self perception theory
Effects are nothing more than reasonable inferences that people make about their own attitudes based upon their perceptions of their behaviors.Similar to how observers draw conclusions about our attitudes from our behaviors
Does not work well when applied to important attitudes, but may explain ambivalent situations
Discuss
|
|
|
