6.4 Cognitive Dissonance and Attitude Change

Cognitive dissonance theory explains why we feel uncomfortable when our thoughts and actions don't match up. It's a key concept in understanding how attitudes change and why we sometimes adjust our beliefs to fit our behavior.

This theory connects to the broader topic of attitude change by showing how internal conflicts can lead to shifts in our views. It's not just about outside influences – our own actions can reshape our attitudes too.

Cognitive Dissonance Theory

Understanding Cognitive Dissonance

Top images from around the web for Understanding Cognitive Dissonance

• 

  Learning Approaches | Introductory Psychology View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  What Is Cognitive Dissonance? by paradigm-shifting on DeviantArt View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy – General Psychology View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Learning Approaches | Introductory Psychology View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  What Is Cognitive Dissonance? by paradigm-shifting on DeviantArt View original

  Is this image relevant?

1 of 3

Top images from around the web for Understanding Cognitive Dissonance

• 

  Learning Approaches | Introductory Psychology View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  What Is Cognitive Dissonance? by paradigm-shifting on DeviantArt View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy – General Psychology View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Learning Approaches | Introductory Psychology View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  What Is Cognitive Dissonance? by paradigm-shifting on DeviantArt View original

  Is this image relevant?

1 of 3

• Cognitive dissonance theory explains psychological discomfort arising from conflicting thoughts or behaviors
• Developed by Leon Festinger in 1957, describes mental tension when beliefs and actions misalign
• Occurs when individuals hold contradictory beliefs or engage in behavior inconsistent with their attitudes
• Motivates people to reduce discomfort by changing beliefs, attitudes, or behaviors
• Intensity of dissonance depends on importance of conflicting elements and number of dissonant thoughts

Strategies for Reducing Dissonance

• Dissonance reduction strategies aim to alleviate psychological discomfort
• Changing one of the dissonant elements (attitudes, beliefs, or behaviors)
• Adding new consonant elements to outweigh dissonant ones
• Reducing importance of dissonant elements
• Seeking information supporting the chosen alternative
• Avoiding information contradicting the chosen alternative

Counterattitudinal Behavior and Attitude Change

• Counterattitudinal behavior involves acting contrary to one's beliefs or attitudes
• Often leads to attitude change to align with behavior, reducing dissonance
• Induced compliance paradigm demonstrates this effect in experimental settings
• Attitude change more likely when external justification for behavior is minimal
• Internal justification process leads to attitude shift to match behavior

Attitude Polarization and Group Dynamics

• Attitude polarization occurs when exposure to conflicting information strengthens pre-existing attitudes
• Group polarization amplifies this effect in social settings
• Selective exposure contributes to polarization by seeking confirming information
• Confirmation bias reinforces existing beliefs, leading to stronger attitudes
• Can result in increased group cohesion but also exacerbate social divisions

Experimental Paradigms

Forced Compliance Paradigm

• Forced compliance paradigm investigates attitude change following counterattitudinal behavior
• Participants induced to engage in behavior contrary to their beliefs or attitudes
• Classic study: Festinger and Carlsmith (1959) boring task experiment
• Participants paid $1 or$20 to tell others the task was enjoyable
• $1 group experienced more dissonance, leading to greater attitude change
• Demonstrates inverse relationship between external justification and attitude change

Free Choice Paradigm

• Free choice paradigm examines decision-making and post-decision dissonance
• Participants choose between similarly attractive alternatives
• After choice, tendency to enhance chosen option and devalue rejected option
• Spreading of alternatives observed as cognitive dissonance reduction strategy
• Jack Brehm's classic study (1956) with household appliances demonstrates this effect
• Choice-induced preference change persists over time, influencing future decisions

Induced Compliance and Attitude Change

• Induced compliance involves persuading individuals to act against their attitudes
• Often used in experimental settings to study cognitive dissonance effects
• Minimal external pressure or reward maximizes dissonance and attitude change
• Low-ball technique uses this principle in real-world persuasion contexts
• Foot-in-the-door technique also leverages induced compliance for behavior change

Effort Justification and Cognitive Dissonance

• Effort justification explains tendency to value outcomes more when effort is expended
• Based on cognitive dissonance theory: high effort for low-value outcome creates dissonance
• Aronson and Mills' (1959) study on group initiation demonstrates this effect
• Participants who underwent severe initiation valued group membership more
• Applies to various contexts (hazing rituals, difficult academic programs)
• Explains sunk cost fallacy in decision-making processes

Alternative Explanations

Self-Perception Theory as an Alternative Framework

• Self-perception theory proposed by Daryl Bem as alternative to cognitive dissonance theory
• Suggests individuals infer their attitudes by observing their own behavior
• Assumes people have limited introspective access to their internal states
• Explains attitude change without invoking internal psychological tension
• Predicts similar outcomes to cognitive dissonance theory in many situations
• Differences emerge in situations involving clear pre-existing attitudes
• Overjustification effect explained by self-perception theory
• Debate continues over which theory better explains various phenomena
• Some researchers propose integrative models combining both theories
• Highlights importance of considering multiple explanatory frameworks in social psychology