Running Head: COGNITIVE DISSONANCE AND ITS USES Reed 1

Analysis of Cognitive Dissonance Theory and Its Societal Uses

Megan Reed

Theories of Human Communication

November 20, 2016

COGNITIVE DISSONANCE AND ITS USES Reed 2

Analysis of Cognitive Dissonance Theory and Its Societal Uses

Cognitive dissonance theory has been used and applied for many years throughout the

field of Communications and more. Cognitive dissonance theory has proved to be useful in

society situations allowing understand of and sometimes the predictions of certain human

behaviors. As Griffin, Ledbetter, & Sparks (2015) describe it, cognitive dissonance theory is,

"the distressing mental state caused by inconsistency between a person's two beliefs or a belief

and an action" (P. 200). Leon Festinger, a social psychologist as Stanford University, first began

using this theory to explain the inner contradictions formed in smoker's minds when medical

reports began linking cigarettes to lung cancer and other health issues. From that time on,

cognitive dissonance has been used to explain "various social psychological

phenomena in terms of cognitive consistency," (Gawronski, 2012).

Cognitive dissonance theory has many facets, including selective exposure, postdecision

dissonance, minimal justification hypothesis, compliance, counterattitudinal advocacy, the

reduction process of dissonance, and many more. This allows the theory to break down human

behavior into many pieces, creating an avenue for thorough analysis and possible prediction of

said behavior. The theory starts with the act or belief itself, conflicting with another belief in a

human's mind. This could be, for instance, someone who smokes cigarettes (action), and the

person believing and knowing that smoking cigarettes is bad for their health. This theory relies

on the fact that humans will want to remove these types of mental contradictions in order to

reduce dissonance(Griffin, et al., 2015). There are many ways in which a person can reduce

dissonance, or avoid it all together: (1) Selective exposure, (2) compliance, (3) self-affirmation,

and (4) general rationalization.

COGNITIVE DISSONANCE AND ITS USES 3

Selective exposure is one way in which humans avoid forming dissonance in their belief

systems. It is when we keep ourselves from information or performing actions that might lead to

inconsistencies with our own beliefs (Griffin, et al., 2015). If we smoke cigarettes, we may

change the channel if a stop smoking commercial comes on, so that we don't have to hear the

effects of cigarettes that the advertisement is addressing, such as lung cancer. If we can keep the

thought of getting lung cancer out of our minds, it allows us to keep smoking without feeling

regret or any form of dissonance. Another way in which we reduce dissonance is through

compliance. Compliance is when we use public conformity as a way to perform an action

without necessarily having a private conviction that aligns with the behavior performed (Griffin,

et al., 2015). Self-affirmation is also a way in which we can reduce dissonance, being when a

person uses positive thoughts about themselves in order to justify a behavior they produced yet

don't necessarily agree with. This is normally done by those with high enough self-esteem that

they can call upon the good qualities they have in order to convince themselves they are still a

good person, even though they may have performed an action that goes against what they

consider good. Most people, however, tend to gravitate towards general rationalization. An

example of this would be a smoker justifying smoking, even though it is bad for their health, by

telling themselves they haven't been smoking for very long and can quit any time.

Cognitive dissonance theory, because of its applicable nature, have been used to conduct

many studies to explain and predict behavior. One of the ways in which this theory has been

applied to society is through explaining parents' reactions to children being under the influence

of alcohol. A longitudinal cohortsequential study conducted by Glatz, Stattin, & Kerr, which was

approved by the University Ethics Review Board, used cognitive dissonance theory to form

several hypotheses regarding these parents' behaviors. The study conducted used a school-based
COGNITIVE DISSONANCE AND ITS USES 4

sample of 494 youths (13 and 14 years, 56% boys) and their parents. They used this study to test

two hypotheses originating from cognitive dissonance theory. The first suggesting that when

parents experience dissonance between their attitudes about appropriate behavior for a child and

their child's actual behavior should reduce dissonance by "changing their attitudes rather than

trying to change the behavior of their youths" (Glatz, Stattin, & Kerr, 2012). The second

hypothesis drawn from cognitive dissonance theory implied that upon reducing dissonance, the

parents should feel less discomfort regarding their child's behavior. This study used General

Linear Model to analyze and answer the studies main questions.

In regards to the study's first hypothesis, they found that there wasn't a significant differences of

change in parent's amount of control over their children between parents who had encountered

their child intoxication versus parents who hadn't. The attitude changes of the parents showed

that over time, parents "generally became less opposed" to their children drinking (Glatz, et al.,

2012). The study proved their second hypothesis true, finding that parents who had encountered

their children intoxicated, and chose to keep their opposition toward that kind of youth behavior,

showed more worry and stress toward their children's behavior overall (Glatz, et al., 2012).

Within this study Glatz, Stattin, and Kerr found that through using aspects of cognitive

dissonance theory, they were able to explain current and predict future behaviors of parents

toward intoxicated youths. This is just one way in which cognitive dissonance theory has been

used to discover new behavior regularities in society so that we may better understand ourselves

as human beings.

Another study conducted using cognitive dissonance theory explore the topic of

resistance to diversity among teachers. In a study conducted in 2001, McFalls and Cobb-Roberts

analyzed the dissonance formed by students in multicultural education courses, due to the
COGNITIVE DISSONANCE AND ITS USES 5

exposure "to information that is inconsistent with their prior beliefs and experiences." They

conducted a study using 124 undergraduates enrolled in two sections of a course on diversity

education. The first group consisted of 64 participants, 86% were women, 14% were men,17% of

these participants were African American, 12% Latino American, fewer than 2% were from

other backgrounds (Asian American, Native American) and the rest were Caucasian. The second

group consisted of 70% women, 30% men, most were of Caucasian decent, 17% were African

American, 10% were Latino American, and 6% were other. "One pedagogical implication of..."

cognitive dissonance theory "...is to embed dissonance-reduction strategies into the multicultural

education curriculum" in order to lower resistance to diversity in students (McFalls & Cobb-

Roberts, 2001). The study supplied group 2 subjects with a lecture on cognitive dissonance

theory before they reviewed the article on white privilege in order to test this hypothesis. Within

this study, McFalls and Cobb-Roberts found three major themes within the analysis of the

subjects' written responses: (1) awareness, (b) uncertainty, and (c) denial. The awareness was

that of students gaining knowledge of white privilege while taking reading an article about

diversity/white privilege, the uncertainty was that some participants we unsure of if they agreed

with information presented within the article provided, and denial was "used as a label for

responses that clearly articulated rejection of... White privilege" (McFalls & Cobb-Roberts,

2001). Within their examples, McFalls and Cobb-Roberts discovered that "students were

applying the concept of cognitive dissonance to explain their reaction to new ideas about White

privilege," (2001) and find that exposing students to cognitive dissonance theory in order to be

less resistant to diversity is an idea worth looking into. In this case, the theory is being used to

create opportunities for social and cultural development within or society.

COGNITIVE DISSONANCE AND ITS USES 6

A study on voting and party preferences has also been conducted using cognitive

dissonance theory as a tool for analysis. Blstad, Dinas, & Riera, used cognitive dissonance

theory as an instrument for examining attitudinal indicators in a study conduction to see how

voters reach their decisions. "The main argument developed and examined in this study is that

casting a ballot actually matters...the act of voting has consequences for peoples attitudes toward

the party opted for..." and this idea stems from theories of many cognitive psychologists, "that

behavior can have attitudinal implications" (Blstad, et al., 2013). Cognitive dissonance theory

was used within this study to analyze the sets of preferences citizens form attitudinally while

making voting and party decisions because of its content on how people conform or modify their

attitudes to external ideas they cannot change. Festinger calls this, "compliance" (Griffin, et al.,

2015). Within this study they found their results were consistent with their predictions of

cognitive dissonance playing a role in producing the effect of voting on party preferences."

cognitive dissonance has the interesting implication that voters who are led to vote for parties

they do not prefer may still come to like them," meaning that in order to reduce dissonance of

feeling like their votes do not matter, voters may go along with public view even if they do not

prefer the specific candidate or party at question(Blstad, et al., 2013).

Another way in which cognitive dissonance has been used in analysis is through neural

(brain) activity. In a study conduction by Carter, Veen, Krug, and Schooler, they found that

portions of cognitive dissonance theory could be proved through brain activity in a controlled set

of patients. Through a Solomon four-group design, participants were scanned "with functional

MRI while they argued that the uncomfortable scanner environment was nevertheless a pleasant

experience" (Carter, Veen, Krug, & Schooler, 2009). Within this study they could visualize

cognitive dissonance happening within the brains of the subjects, through the engagement of "the
COGNITIVE DISSONANCE AND ITS USES 7

dorsal anterior cingulate cortex and anterior insular..." finding that activation of these brain

regions "...tightly predicted participants' subsequent attitude change"(Carter, et al., 2009).

Through this study of cognitive dissonance they were able to discover the neural basis to the

theory, making it more credible overall. This allows for growth of cognitive dissonance theory in

how it can be applied, due to its proven effect on the body and mind.

Cognitive dissonance theory is a theory that can be easily applied to many behavioral

situations. Many behaviors can be described through attitudinal changes as well as uncertainty

reduction, and cognitive dissonance theory lays out a clear path of how to analyze and potentially

predict these behaviors. Humans are very vast and complicated creatures, and in order to best

understand what we do, we must first know why we do it. This theory provides a pathway to

discovery and prediction of what, how, and why we, as humans, do the things we do. In the field

of communication this is very important because who we are and how we react impacts how we

receive and create messages (how we interact with each other). If we can get closer to predicting

behaviors and attitude changes of humans, we might just be able to create a society in which we

all can interact with each other in a kind and healthy manner.
COGNITIVE DISSONANCE AND ITS USES 8

References

Blstad, J., Dinas, E., & Riera, P. (2013). Tactical voting and party preferences: A test of

cognitive dissonance theory. Political Behavior, 35(3), 429-452.

Carter, C. S., van Veen, V., Krug, M. K., & Schooler, J. W. (2009). Neural activity predicts

attitude change in cognitive dissonance. Nature Neuroscience, 12(11), 1469-1474.

Gawronski, B. (2012). Back to the future of dissonance theory: Cognitive consistency as a core

motive. Social Cognition, 30(6), 652.

Glatz, T., Stattin, H., & Kerr, M. (2012). A test of cognitive dissonance theory to explain parents'

reactions to youths' alcohol intoxication. Family Relations, 61(4), 629-641.

McFalls, E. L., & Cobb-Roberts, D. (2001). Reducing resistance to diversity through cognitive

dissonance instruction: Implications for teacher education. Journal of Teacher

Education,52(2), 164-172.