Untitled Essay, Research Paper

Cognitive Dissonance How do human beings make decisions? What triggers a person

to take action at any given point? These are all questions that I will attempt

to answer with my theoretical research into Leon Festinger’s theory

of cognitive dissonance, as well as many of the other related theories. We

often do not realize the psychological events that take place in our everyday

lives. It is important to take notice of theories, such as the balance theory,

the congruency theory and the cognitive dissonance theory so that one’s

self-persuasion occurs knowingly. As psychologist and theorist gain a better

understanding of Festinger’s cognitive dissonance theory manipulation

could occur more easily than it already does in today’s society.

Leon Festinger’s cognitive dissonance theory is very

closely related to many of the consistency theories. The first of the major

consistency theories, the balance theory, was proposed by Fritz Heider (1946,

1958) and was later revised by Theodore Newcomb (1953) (Larson, 1995). Heider

and Newcomb’s theory was mostly looking at the interaction between two

people (interpersonally) and the conflicts that arose between them. When

two people have conflicting opinions or tension is felt between another person,

it is more likely persuasion will occur. Because if no tension was felt between

the two parties, or there were no conflicting opinions there would be no

need to persuade each other. If you think about it persuasion occurs only

because there is tension between two facts, ideas or

people.

Charles Larson writes in his book, Persuasion, Reception

and Responsibility, “another approach to the consistency theory is

congruency theory, by Charles Osgood and Percy Tennenbaum (1955)” (p.82).

This theory suggest that we want to have balance in our lives and there is

a systematic way to numerically figure it out. When two attitudes collide

we must strive to strike a balance between the two attitudes. The balance

varies depending on the intensity we feel about each attitude and our

pre-disposed positions concerning the attitude. We either have a favorable

, neutral or unfavorable opinion concerning ideas. When two attitudes collide

we will attempt to downgrade the favorable position and upgrade the unfavorable

position so that we feel a balance. For example, suppose someone thought

of Mel Gibson as a good role model. Later on they come to find out Mel Gibson

does not like football. If the person was to like both football and Mel Gibson

one of three things would happen: 1) The individual would downgrade their

opinion of Mel Gibson, or 2) downgrade football, or 3) downgrade both. The

action taken would create psychological consistency in one’s mind. These

theories are very interesting and have been quite researched, but none more

so than Leon Festinger’s theory of cognitive dissonance.

Leon Festinger’s theory, unlike the others I have

described, deal with quantitative aspects, as well as qualitative. That’s

what is so different and revolutionary about Festinger’s theory. Robert

Wicklund and Jack Brehm (1976), in their book Perspectives on Cognitive

Dissonance, write,“ Most notably, the original statement of dissonance

theory included propositions about the resistance-to-change of cognitions

and about the proportion of cognitions that are dissonant, both of which

allowed powerful and innovative analyses of psychological situations (p.1).

The term “dissonance” refers to the relation between two elements.

When two elements do not fit together they are considered dissonant. Cognitive

dissonance can be broken down into a number of elements. As Brehm and Cohen

(1962) write, “A dissonant relationship exist between two cognitive

elements when a person possesses one which follows the obverse of another

that he possesses. A person experiences dissonance, that is, a motivational

tension, when he (or she) has cognitions among which there are one or more

dissonant relationships” (p.4).Cognitive dissonance can occur

intrapersonally as well as between two or more people.

With individual cognitive dissonance the individual longs

for consistency within their own mind. Second, there exist dissonance between

two or more people. This occurs when two people have differing opinions about

a particular issue. This phenomenon may have something to do with varying

degrees of knowledge about the issue or different belief systems being enacted.

An example of this can be seen by taking a look at the cultures of the West

versus cultures of the East. Cultures of the East value loyalty and honor.

Cultures of the West have different value systems that often collide with

those of the East. Between two parties, dissonance may arise from: (1) logical

inconsistency; (2) because of cultural mores: (3) because of a specific opinion;

and (4) because of past experience. To reduce cognitive dissonance a person

can either reduce the dissonant cognition, or its relative importance can

be reduced (Wicklund and Brehm, 1976, p.5). Although the theory assumes that

dissonance will be eliminated or reduced, only the thought about taking action

to do so is a given. The means employed by any given individual to meet these

ends is still open to speculation. Action taken depends solely on the many

variables involved, such as ego involvement, commitment, past experiences

and so on. We all react differently to dissonant cognitions that we are

confronted with. My research attempts to examine the different reactions

that people have had to different opinions I have declared which involve

them heavily. The area I have chosen to look at is the habits which many

of my close friends engage in: smoking. This is often a difficult topic to

discuss because it is an addictive habit and very personal to many people.

Full well knowing these facts, I attempted to delve in the minds of my friends

and put many of the theories afore mentioned to use in the practical world.

To undertake my research project I observed my friends

in their everyday routines. I chose to attempt to persuade many of my friends

to stop smoking. While attempting to undertake this momentous task I observed

many of the consistency theories, especially Festinger’s theory of

cognitive-dissonance. The research method that was used was first hand

observation. You could say that I was undertaking a form of ethnographic

research. Most of the time I had to become an active member of the persuasion

process, or the subject of smoking possibly might not have been talked about.

The context I chose was that of my friends at home.

All of the participants in the study did not know I was logging their behavior

for later use in this research paper. Either myself and/or my friends would

be active participants in the persuasion process. The basic premise of the

cognitive-dissonance theory is that when two pieces of information do not

follow each other we will experience some form of psychological tension,

which we will attempt to reduce in some way. Often times, according to Leon

Festinger, people attempt to reduce cognitive dissonance whenever possible

(Gleitman, 1983, p.12). I noticed many times that my friends were very interested

in the topic of quitting their habit, and some at times took the issue

personally. When people are personally involved with an issue, much like

the use of tobacco, they are much more attentive to the issue (Petty &

Cacioppo, 1981, p. 847).

For example, on 3/31/96 I told my three friends that I

was concerned about how much they had been smoking recently. On the average

they are smoking 20 cigarettes a day. One of the girls immediately retaliated

with the statement that “ her grandmother smoked for nearly all of her

life and she is in good health.” In this particular instance we can

see the basic premise of the consistency theories at work. The girl who said

this statement likes me. She also enjoys smoking. When I made the statement

that I was concerned with the levels of tobacco consumption she disregarded

my opinion by using past experiences as evidence to back her point. She is

a friend so I assume she somewhat values my opinion, but she upgraded her

opinion of smoking and downgraded my opinion. She experienced some form of

dissonance when I stated my opinion. She reduced her dissonance and thus

was in balance. This is where Festinger’s theory of cognitive dissonance

attempts to rationalize her behavior.

The other consistency theories do not recognize the degree

to which the dissonance exist. If you were to not use Festinger’s model,

most likely you would have assumed that my opinion would have changed her

attitude and actions. After all, I did have a contradictory opinion that

did not follow hers, and dissonance was felt. That’s what is missing

from the balance theory and the congruency theory: “latitudes of

attitude”. This theory, unlike many others, must factor in the human

psyche as a variable. The persuasion process did not occur in this case because

my friends attitude towards not smoking was so anti-quitting, that it might

be impossible to change. You cannot think of this theory in regards to machines

you must look at it from the human perspective.

Another example of observable cognitive-dissonance occurred

on 4/7/96. The same three friends and myself were watching television. An

anti-smoking campaign sponsored by the American Red Cross came on the television.

Various facts about the amount of people that die every year from smoking

and statistics about the amount of Americans with lung cancer were shared.

I asked the girls what they thought about the information. They all agreed

that it could happen to them, but they hoped it did not. In this case, I

believe dissonance was created by exposure to information. The girls did

not like the information and downplayed its validity. Not one of the girls

stood up and said, “I am going to quit smoking today, I am really at

risk of getting lung cancer!” Once again personal involvement was a

given, and once again no action was taken. The girls feel to strong about

smoking and refuse to quit. We must ask ourselves what a solution to this

problem could be? Why is it that smokers, in the face of grave danger, refuse

to reduce dissonance by acting out their urge to quit smoking?

The cognitive-dissonance theory is a part of our everyday

lives, whether we realize it or not. When we are presented with view points

or opinions that differ from our own often times we feel dissonance. We,

as human beings, are always striving to keep our lives in balance. Often

a balance in our psyche requires that we not heed the warnings of things

to come. As I have shown, cognitive-dissonance is utilized to avoid taking

action.

As many theorist have stated cognitive dissonance does

create an internal conflict that causes someone to take action. In the case

of smokers, I must regrettably report that smoking is vary rarely avoided,

even with dissonance in full effect. Smokers, when presented with hard core

data showing a decline in health due to smoking, refuse to head warning.

This is evident with all of the “guaranteed” products to help people

stop smoking. First there was “The Patch” and now the consumers

are intrigued with products, such as Niccorrest Gum. Apparently no matter

how much dissonance is felt and to what degree it is felt does not matter.

Therefore, it may not be possible to get rid of dissonance or even to reduce

it materially by changing one’s behavior or feeling.

The research I have conducted supports my claim that it

is nearly impossible to change the actions of smokers even though massive

amounts of cognitive dissonance are felt. I believe that many of the people

being observed reduced the overall magnitude of dissonance by adding new

cognitive elements. No matter how much dissonance is felt, the smoker will

always find elements that are consonant (agreeable) with the fact of smoking.

The will power of individuals feeling as though they have to have smoking

in their everyday lives is, often times, far to powerful for dissonance to

overcome. Perhaps research such as mine can be useful to further research

into the area of dissonance and the use of tobacco. Much work still needs

to be done in this area. We see so many people dying from lung cancer. Something

must be done. Perhaps looking at effective methods of the use of cognitive

dissonance can be helpful in this arena.