Steve Jackson	Survey of Communication Theory: Cognitive Dissonance	- Home -
(Note: This paper was written at the University of South Carolina) by: Dewey Adams , Mendi Chappel, Karen Stein 27, September, 1999 This is the greatest paper that we have ever written and we will get an F on this paper. These two ideas are dissonant and we do not fully believe one, or both, of these statements; our minds will not let us. The theory of cognitive dissonance discusses how our minds deal with information that is not consistent with other information we receive or already possess. This paper talks briefly about the theory's main ideas, the theory's history, its relevance to studies in human communication, and the evidence that supports and refutes this theory. The theory of Cognitive Dissonance states that your mind tries to achieve consonance, or agreement amongst all of your thoughts, ideas, and pieces of knowledge. According to the theory all cognitions, the aforementioned thoughts, ideas, and pieces of knowledge, are related to each other in one of three ways: irrelevance, consonance, or dissonance ( Festinger, 1957 ). Irrelevant cognitions have no relation to each other; for example, it's raining outside and the University of South Carolina Gamecocks are the greatest football team. These two ideas are not related to each other; so, your mind does not care if they coexist. Consonant cognitions are related to each other and support one another; for example, the University of South Carolina Gamecocks are the greatest football team and the University South Carolina Gamecocks won the national football title. These ideas support each other, but do not necessarily have to be in a cause and effect relationship. Since these ideas support each other, your mind also allows their coexistence. Dissonant cognitions are related to each other and refute or disprove one another; for example, the University of South Carolina Gamecocks are the greatest football team and the University of South Carolina Gamecocks have lost their last fourteen games. These ideas do not support each other, but do not necessarily exist in a one or the other relationship. Since the ideas are in opposition, your mind does not want to allow these ideas to coexist. Dissonance in your mind is like hunger in your stomach, the stronger the dissonance the greater the desire to remove or lessen the dissonance. There are many ways to deal with dissonance, but most of them fit into one of three groups: increasing the amount or value of consonant information, decreasing the amount or value of dissonant information, and blatant ignorance of the facts (Patty, http://ccwf.cc.utexas.edu/~benj/patty). Let us use the Gamecock football example to illustrate a few of the ways. The first category groups the actions taken when you find more consonant information. For example, you focus on the Gamecocks' great coach, Lou Holtz. You could also use peer pressure to assert consonance: everyone else likes the Gamecocks so they must be good. Another attempt to gain more consonant information could manifest itself in the attention paid to positive details, like our great defense. The second group of actions are all the actions taken to decrease the amount of dissonant information. For example, you could just ignore the media publications that present Gamecock football as less than stellar. Or, you could discredit the source. I mean what does Sports Illustrated know, really. The final category of actions is the least logical, but possibly strongest. Festinger, himself, noted that "a man who is sure of something is hard to convince differently"(Festinger, 1964 ). Since we just quoted Festinger, now would be a good time to discuss the history of the theory. Leon Festinger is the father of Cognitive Dissonance Theory. His first book on the subject, A Theory Of Cognitive Dissonance, was published in 1957 ( Festinger, 1957 ). The theory was born when a group of sociologists, May Brodbeck, Don Martindale, Jack Brehm, Alvin Borderman, and Festinger, were asked to make a propositional inventory of the research literature owned by the Ford Foundation ( Festinger, 1957 ). The group came across some illogical information pertaining to an earthquake in Asia in 1943. This information presented that people were actually starting and believing rumors of worse tragedies than what had actually happened. These seemed to serve no purpose except to cause anxiety and were dubbed illogical. However, Festinger proposed that these rumors were designed to justify the anxiety that the people all ready felt and to combat the dissonance of logic telling them that they were not in any real danger ( Festinger, 1957 ). Although the theory was first recognized in a natural environment, it has been widely used to explain the effects of cults and their failed prophecies (Watters, www.freeminds.org/psych/propfail.htm ). Leon Festinger had studied groups that predicted the end of the world and observed that members became stronger after the prophecy failed. In order to maintain their self-image and values, Festinger predicted that they would change whatever was in conflict to minimize the discrepancy in their identity. Furthermore, cults manipulate this dissonance to exploit and control its members. Cults are not, however, the only place that cognitive dissonance has been studied. Examples of cognitive dissonance and its effects can be found almost anywhere in modern society. Dissonance affects people's decisions every day. Social psychology professor Elliot Aronson performed an experiment involving cognitive dissonance at the University of California at Santa Cruz. Aronson hypothesized that people with strong views on a particular subject need to have the hypocrisy of their actions proven to them before they will be willing to change their ways. In Aronson's experiment, he attempted to use cognitive dissonance to promote the use of condoms by sexually active college students who were currently practicing "unsafe sex." Once they recognized their past actions as being hypocritical, they were much more willing to alter them ( Shea, 1997 ). Another experiment provides substantial evidence that dissonance is especially present in consumer-oriented decisions, and has a direct link to self-confidence issues. A group of 18-22 year old consumers were asked to choose between several choices of image magazines and news magazines, and then report how they liked them and if they were really as good as their reputation makes them seem. The most post-decisional dissonance occurred with the image magazines, and many also felt that the flashy news magazines they had chosen because of their reputation were no better than less costly substitutes. This experiment attempts to make a point about the connection between dissonance and self-esteem. There seems to be a direct correlation. ( Murphy and Miller, 1997). The media seems to have a large influence over popular opinion. Several examples of news coverage swaying popular opinion immediately come to mind. Up until the time Upton Sinclair exposed the meat industry in his widely-read novel The Jungle, most American citizens had full faith in the purity of packaged meat. Because of the book and incurred media coverage, not only did popular opinion change, but it also brought more investigation and reform to the industry. Another example would be Nixon and the Watergate trial. He was a very popular president and public figure until the trial and the media coverage. Media definitely has a role in changing popular opinion, and because their influence is so far-reaching, it enables groups of people to influence opinion more easily than without it. Steven J. Heine and Darrin R. Lehman studied to see if cognitive dissonance applied cross culturally. At that time, most experiments pertaining to dissonance had been conducted in North America. Their results demonstrated that dissonance depends on the individual's view of self. If an individual has an independent view of self, his actions are under his control and are determined by his inner feelings. Most westerners possess this view of self. Therefore, they experience dissonance when their self-image is threatened. On the other hand, non-westerners, especially Asians have a different view of self, known as interdependent view. This view stresses the relationship of the individual to others, rather than just the individual. One does not view the actions of the interdependent self as a reflection of who he really is. Consequently, Asians experience less dissonance because they do not feel a threat to their self-image as a westerner who possesses an independent view of self. Heine and Lehman's work concludes that dissonance does change according to culture because of the differences between the view individuals have of themselves in different cultures. While much data exists to confirm the theory of cognitive dissonance, there is information that refutes the theory ( Heine and Lehman, 1997 ). One of the biggest problems with the theory of cognitive dissonance is in the predictions it makes about people's post-decision information search. Cognitive Dissonance states that after a decision is made people will seek out consonant information, to affirm the decision, and avoid dissonant information, to avoid dissonance ( Festinger, 1957 ). However, in the majority of the experiments conducted by Festinger the subjects did seek out consonant information, but did not avoid dissonant information. They did not seek out this information, but for the theory to be completely correct there must appear an active avoidance of dissonant information ( ). For example, the Walster findings showed that a man presented with two comparable jobs will, after a year of working the chosen job, will tend to glorify the chosen job and downplay the qualities of the job not taken. The text argues that this reaction is logical if you consider that the person has had time to grow to like his other job and make it 'his'. In another of Walster's experiments, the subjects were left alone after their decision was made. These subjects tended to not seek reassurance because of their lack of new information and their isolation ( Festinger, 1964 ). An article by Leonard Berkowitz and Patricia Devine attempts to explain why cognitive dissonance is used less in the present-day. According to Berkowitz and Devine, "social psychology currently favors an analytic over a synthetic approach to research and theorizing, leading to a decreased interest in "big picture" formulations covering many apparently different domains" ( Berkowitz and Devine, 1995 ). They feel that dissonance theory is too broad to cover issues in psychology today. Bibliography: Berkowtiz, Leonard and Patrcia G. Devine. (1989) "Research Traditions, Analysis, and Synthesis in Social Psychological Theories:The Case of Cognitive Dissonance." Persoanlity and Social Psychology Bulletin. Society for Persoanlity and Social Psychology INC. Festinger, Leon. (1957). A THEORY OF COGNITIVE DISSONANCE Stanford University Press. Festinger, Leon. (1964). CONFLICT, DECISION, AND DISSONANCE Stanford University Press. Heine, Steven J. and Darrin R. Lehman. (1997). "Culture, Dissonance, and Self-Affirmation." Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin April, 1997. Murphy, Patricia L. and Carol T. Miller. (1995). "Post decisional dissonance and the commodified self-concept: a cross-cultural examination."Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin August, 1995. Patty & Benji. (1999). Online:http://ccwf.cc.utexas.edu/~benj/patty/. Shea, Christopher. (1997). "A U. of California psychologist investigates new approaches to changing human behavior."The Chronicle of Higher Education June 20, 1997. Watters, Randal. (1999). Online: http://www.freeminds.org/psych/propfail.htm.

This page design copyright 1999 by Steve N. Jackson.

Contents copyright 1999 by Steve N. Jackson and Authors.

 

Version 7.09 (19 July).