C6 Flashcards
Cognitive dissonance:
Discomfort that people feel when two
cognitions (beliefs, attitudes) conflict, or when
they behave in ways that are inconsistent with
their conception of themselves (which is harmful to self-esteem)
three ways to reduce dissonance
- Change behavior (e.g. i won’t cheat anymore)
- Justify behavior by changing one of the
dissonant cognitions (e.g. changing from cheating=dishonest to cheating isn’t actually dishonest) - Justify behavior by adding new/consonant cognitions (e.g. even though it’s dishonest because it would also be bad to disappoint my family by doing badly)
decision making and cognitive dissonance
Every time we make a decision, we experience dissonance, because there are still some negative aspects (downsides) to the alternative we chose, and there are still some positive aspects (upsides) to the alternative we rejected.
dealing with cognitive dissonance in decision making
Distort likes and dislikes; Downplay negative aspects of chosen alternative and positive aspects of rejected alternative
Postdecision dissonance
Dissonance aroused after making a decision, typically reduced by enhancing the attractiveness of the chosen alternative and devaluating the rejected alternatives
what increases dissonance in decision making?
More important decisions = more
dissonance
•Greater permanence = more dissonance
Permanence of decision
How difficult it is to revoke
Lowballing:
–Salesperson induces a customer to agree to
purchase a product at a very low cost,
subsequently claims it was an error, and then
raises the price.
–Frequently, the customer will agree to make
the purchase at the inflated price.
why does lowballing work?
how is this cognitive dissonance?
- Sense of commitment
- Sense of commitment triggers the
anticipation of an exciting event - Price only slightly higher than other prices
elsewhere
cognitive dissonance because two beliefs of “i’m committed to buying this” and “the price is too high” conflict, and the person resolves it by changing the cognition of “the price is too high” to “the price is acceptable.”
a question on cognitive dissonance from yours truly!
if a salesperson says to a customer, “if you really cared, you’d have bought her a diamond!” how is that creating cognitive dissonance? how to resolve it?
Person has two truths now: “I really care,” and “I don’t want to buy her a diamond.” yet all of a sudden, caring=diamond, so those two are in conflict.
they could say “it’s not true that caring=diamond” or “caring is also demonstrable in other ways” (new, consonant cognition); they could say “fine, i’ll get a diamond” (change behavior), or “I don’t really care” (changing one of the cognitions)
Justification of effort:
The tendency for individuals to increase their
liking for something they have worked hard to
attain (in response to cog. dis. that “thing i worked for is worth x amount” and “i worked for the equivalent of 2x”. so person changes the cognition “thing i worked for is actually worth 2x, which matches up with how hard i worked.”
External justification:
–A reason or an explanation for dissonant
personal behavior that resides outside the
individual (e.g., to receive a large reward or
avoid a severe punishment)
•Internal justification:
–The reduction of dissonance by changing
something about oneself (e.g., one’s attitude
or behavior)
counterattitudinal advocacy
Stating an opinion or attitude that runs
counter to one’s private belief or attitude
justifying good and harmful deeds
Dissonance theory predicts that when we
dislike someone, if we do them a favor, we
will like them more. (I think also if we do something wrong to them we dislike them more.)
–Behavior is dissonant with attitude
–Change attitude about person to resolve
dissonance
•“The Ben Franklin effect”
a person who has already performed a favor for another person is more likely to do another favor/like them more than if they had received a favor from that person.
Moral dilemmas in cognitive dissonance and the implications of its dissonance
Implications for self-esteem if cognitive dissonance is not resolved/if a person perceives themselves as acting immorally
Dissonance reduction: in the future people may behave either more ethically (bc they resolved the dissonance by changing their behavior or less ethically (bc they resolved the dissonance by convincing themselves the unethical behavior isn’t so bad)
severity of threat of punishment’s impact on behavior
if threat of punishment for engaging in a forbidden behavior is severe, there is sufficient external justification for refraining from behavior
(e.g. let’s say you really wanted to cheat, didn’t, and got a bad grade. if cheating is harshly punished that’s enough of a reason not to; you can say to yourself, the consequences of cheating would have been really bad)
If punishment is less severe, there is insufficient external justification, and it creates greater need for internal justification
(e.g. if cheating is not harshly punished there’s a greater need to internally justify your behavior of not cheating–let’s say by telling yourself you’re glad you didn’t cheat bc it’s immoral.) you change attitudes via self-persuasion
Insufficient punishment:
The dissonance aroused when individuals
lack sufficient external justification for having
resisted a desired activity or object, usually
resulting in individuals’ devaluing the
forbidden activity or object
What happens when external justification for resisting an object or activity is insufficient
–Dissonance is aroused
–Reduce dissonance by
▪Self-persuasion
–e.g., devaluing forbidden activity or object
hypocrisy paradigm
Induce hypocrisy
–Make person aware of conflict between
Attitudes and Behavior
–Hypocrisy creates dissonance
–They then reduce dissonance by changing behavior
▪e.g., if someone say people are dumb for not using condoms but not using them themselves point out the hypocrisy and get them to start using condoms
Self-affirmation theory
–The idea that people can reduce threats to
their self-esteem by affirming themselves in
areas unrelated to the source of the threat (like it’s okay that i did badly on that test because I’m really good at Gemara!)
Self-evaluation maintenance theory:
–Idea that we experience dissonance when
someone close to us outperforms us in an
area that is central to our self-esteem
–Dissonance can be reduced by becoming less
close to the person, changing our behavior so
that we now outperform them, or deciding that
the area is not that important to us after all.
reducing dissonance in relationships
• Distance self from the person who
outperforms us
•Change how relevant the task is to our self-esteem
•Change one’s performance relative to the
other person’s
narcissism
Combination of excessive self-love and a
lack of empathy toward others
•Has increased in college students since
the 1980s
what’s the connection btwn narcissism and cognitive dissonance?
Someone with high narcissism (HN) can be manipulative and lacks empathy. A partner may experience dissonance because those behaviors can affect their positive views of themselves. (I like a person who does not treat me well).
A person with HN has impossibly high goals and elevated self-esteem. When they are unable to achieve these goals, it is inconsistent with their expectations/positive evaluation of self. (BTW, depression is common in people with N personality disorder).
