Cognitive dissonance defines a state of personality characterized by inconsistency and inconsistency of views, beliefs, attitudes and external conditions. The author of the theory and the very concept of cognitive dissonance is L. Festinger. This teaching is based on a person’s desire for a state of mental comfort. Only by following the path of achieving goals and successes does a person receive satisfaction from life. Dissonance is a state of internal discomfort caused by contradictions between stable ideas of the individual and new facts or conditions. This feeling causes a desire to stimulate the process of cognition in order to verify the truth of the new information. Festinger's theory of cognitive dissonance provides an explanation for conflict situations that arise in the cognitive system of an individual. The main conflicting ideas in the human mind are religious, ideological, value, emotional and other inconsistencies.
Causes of dissonance
This condition may occur due to the following reasons:
- in case of logical inconsistency;
- when an individual’s opinion enters into a group opinion;
- due to established traditions and customs;
- in case of inconsistency between past experience and the new situation.
Modern psychology studies the state of cognitive dissonance in order to explain and study the state of internal inconsistency that occurs in an individual or group of people. An individual, having accumulated a certain life experience, must act contrary to it, according to 
changed conditions. This causes a feeling of discomfort. To weaken this feeling, a person makes a compromise, trying to smooth out the internal conflict.
An example of cognitive dissonance can be any situation that changes a person’s plans. For example: a person decided to go out of town for a picnic. Before leaving, he saw that it was raining. The man did not expect precipitation; the conditions of his trip changed. Thus, the rain became a source of cognitive dissonance.
It is quite understandable that every person would like to reduce dissonance, and, if possible, eliminate it altogether. This can be achieved in three ways: by changing one's behavioral element, by changing the cognitive elements of external factors, or by introducing new cognitive elements into one's life experience.
The cognitive dissonance(from the Latin cognitio “knowledge” and dissonantia “dissonance”, “discord”, “lack of harmony”) - a state of mental discomfort of an individual caused by a collision in his mind of conflicting ideas: ideas, beliefs, values or emotional reactions.
Cognitive dissonance theory
The theory of cognitive dissonance was proposed by Leon Festinger in 1957. She explains the conflict situations that often arise in the “cognitive structure of one person.” The theory aims to explain and explore the state of cognitive dissonance that arises in a person as a reaction to a certain situation, the actions of individuals or an entire society.
Main hypotheses of the theory
The emergence of dissonance
Dissonance can appear for various reasons:
- due to logical inconsistency;
- due to cultural customs;
- in the event that an individual opinion is not part of a broader opinion;
- due to the inconsistency of past experience relative to the present situation.
As a result of this behavior, there is a change in certain attitudes of a person (which are influenced by the situation in one way or another), and this change can be justified based on the fact that it is vital for a person to maintain the consistency of his knowledge.
Therefore, people are ready to justify their delusions: a person who has committed an offense or mistake is inclined to justify himself in his thoughts, gradually shifting his beliefs about what happened towards the fact that what happened was actually not so terrible. In this way, the individual “regulates” his thinking in order to reduce the conflict within himself.
Degree of dissonance
In various situations that arise in everyday life, dissonance can increase or decrease - it all depends on the problem that faces the person.
Thus, the degree of dissonance will be minimal if a person, for example, gives money to a beggar on the street, who (apparently) does not really need alms. On the contrary, the degree of dissonance will increase many times over if a person faces a serious exam and he does not try to prepare for it.
Dissonance can (and does) arise in any situation when a person has to make a choice. Moreover, the degree of dissonance will increase depending on how important this choice is for the individual.
The degree of cognitive dissonance can be measured based on a Fourier hologram.
Reducing dissonance
The existence of dissonance, regardless of the degree of its strength, forces a person to get rid of it completely, and if for some reason this is not yet possible, then to significantly reduce it. To reduce the perception of dissonance, a person can resort to four methods:
Let's explain this with a specific example. For example, a person is a heavy smoker. He receives information about the dangers of smoking from a doctor, an acquaintance, from newspapers or from another source. Based on the information received, he will either change his behavior - that is, quit smoking because he is convinced that it is too harmful to his health - or he may deny that smoking is harmful to his body. He may try, for example, to find some information that smoking may be "beneficial" to some extent (for example, while he smokes, he does not gain excess weight, as happens when a person quits smoking), and thereby reduce the importance of negative information. This reduces the dissonance between his knowledge and actions. In the third case, he will try to avoid any information emphasizing the dangers of smoking.
Preventing and avoiding dissonance
In some cases, an individual can prevent the emergence of dissonance (and, as a result, internal discomfort) by trying to avoid any information regarding his problem that conflicts with already available information.
The mechanisms of “filtering” information that is personally significant for the subject are well described by the theory of “psychological defenses” (the concept was introduced by Sigmund Freud and further developed by his daughter Anna Freud). “A clash”, a contradiction that arises in the mind of an individual regarding deeply, personally significant topics, is, according to S. Freud, the main mechanism in the formation of neuroses.
If dissonance has already arisen, the individual can avoid increasing it by adding one or more cognitive elements “to the cognitive scheme” instead of the existing negative element (which generates dissonance). Thus, the individual will be interested in searching for information that would approve his choice (decision) and, ultimately, weaken or completely eliminate dissonance, while avoiding sources of information that will increase it. However, often such behavior of an individual can lead to negative consequences: a person may develop a fear of dissonance or prejudice, which is a dangerous factor influencing the individual’s worldview.
A relationship of incongruity (dissonance) may exist between two (or more) cognitive elements. When dissonance occurs, the individual strives to reduce its degree, avoid it, or get rid of it completely. This desire is justified by the fact that a person sets as his goal a change in his behavior, a search for new information regarding the situation or object that gave rise to dissonance.
It is quite understandable that it is much easier for a person to agree with the existing state of affairs, adjusting his internal attitudes according to the current situation, instead of continuing to be tormented by the question of whether he did the right thing. Often dissonance arises as a consequence of making important decisions. Choosing between two equally tempting alternatives is not easy for a person, but having finally made this choice, a person often begins to feel “dissonant cognitions.”
Cognitive dissonance is the mental stress or discomfort experienced by a person when forced to hold two or more contradictory ideas in his or her field of vision. Cognitive dissonance also occurs when a person encounters new information that contradicts his knowledge, beliefs, or values.
Who proposed the theory of cognitive dissonance?
The term “cognitive dissonance” and the corresponding theory were proposed by the American social psychologist Leon Festinger, a student of Kurt Lewin, back in 1957. It was this theory that brought the scientist universal recognition, and two years after its publication, Festinger was awarded the Outstanding Contribution to Science Award established by the American Psychological Association.
The theory of cognitive dissonance was proposed by a psychologist after incredible rumors about the consequences of earthquakes spread in several American states. Analyzing the reasons for the widespread belief in these rumors, Festinger suggested that a person, due to some of his internal characteristics, strives to achieve a balance between his knowledge and motives, on the one hand, and information coming from outside, on the other. This is how Festinger's theory of cognitive dissonance was born.
Introduction to Dissonance Theory
A person tries to achieve internal harmony and coherence. This was known long before the appearance of Festinger's theory - many scientists and philosophers spoke about it. Leon Festinger pointed out precisely the desire of any person to put his beliefs and views in order, because inconsistent ideas bring with them disharmony and internal chaos.
In his scientific works, the American psychologist noted that cognitive dissonance is a special state, a kind of precursor to the activity that a person will try to develop in order to quickly get rid of unpleasant sensations. This is about the same as searching for food when a person is hungry.
The degree of manifestation of cognitive dissonance can vary. Of great importance in this case is how strong a person’s existing beliefs are, as well as the extent of their inconsistency with new knowledge. The authority of the source from which information that is recognized by a person as contradictory is also important.
What happens if a contradiction arises in a person’s system of knowledge and beliefs?
How does a person behave in a state of cognitive dissonance?
Sometimes a person experiencing dissonance recognizes that there is a discrepancy between his knowledge and behavior, but refuses to change anything. However, much more often a person tries to rationalize the contradiction. For example, he can drink liters of coffee and still realize that it is harmful to his health. And he will find excuses for himself: the coffee is delicious, it makes you want to sleep less, and your performance improves after a few cups. As a result, he convinces himself that everything is fine. There is no contradiction.
However, if the coffee drinker's heart begins to play around, his beliefs will no longer be consistent. Along with health problems will come psychological discomfort. A contradiction in beliefs arises, which soon develops into cognitive dissonance. This state prompts a person to make any changes, in our case - to reduce the amount of coffee consumed.
In what other situations does dissonance occur?
Cognitive dissonance is a condition that can manifest itself in completely different situations. For example, when it is necessary:
- explain strange, mixed feelings;
- minimize regrets about making the wrong choice;
- justify behavior that is inconsistent with existing views;
- change your opinion about another person;
- confirm an already existing belief when, in a situation of contradiction, a person tries to find references and sources that testify in favor of the correctness of his opinion.
Festinger's theory of cognitive dissonance. Basic provisions
Together with the concept of cognitive dissonance, Festinger introduced the category of consonance. By consonance he understood a state in which a person’s beliefs, ideas and new knowledge are consistent with each other.
So, the theory of dissonance looked like this.
Proposition 1. The state of cognitive dissonance is a strong motivation. So, if a person experiences a contradiction, he will try to reduce its degree and, if possible, move to consonance.
Proposition 2. A person in a state of cognitive dissonance will try to avoid new knowledge or beliefs, the acceptance of which may mean an increase in the degree of dissonance.
How to Reduce Cognitive Dissonance
To reduce or minimize the state of cognitive dissonance, there are three main strategies.
- Focus on more favorable beliefs. For example, a student is not preparing for an important test, which is only two days away. At the same time, he understands perfectly well that his knowledge is not enough to be marked “passed,” but he tells himself that there is still enough time before the retake, and he will definitely have time to learn everything.
- Reduce the importance of conflicting beliefs. For example, a person learns that a sedentary lifestyle shortens life expectancy. However, he works in an office and cannot afford to move more during the day. And then the person tells himself that a healthy diet can compensate for a forced sedentary lifestyle.
- Change conflicting beliefs so that they are consistent with each other. This strategy is considered one of the most effective, but it is quite difficult to successfully implement it. The hardest time is when beliefs are already firmly rooted in consciousness.
Has the theory of cognitive dissonance found any practical application? Without a doubt.
Practical application of the theory of cognitive dissonance
Festinger's cognitive dissonance not only explains some inappropriate human behavior. It also found practical applications in many areas of human life.
For example, a teacher can stimulate students' desire to learn something new by causing them cognitive dissonance. To do this, he can challenge the point of view of one or more of his students and invite them to conduct practical experiments. This is how students become motivated to learn.
The theory of cognitive dissonance is often used by marketers: entire sales strategies are built on its principles. For example, the advertising slogan of one well-known Western company is “You take care of yourself and your family. Why not choose the best? causes cognitive dissonance in the buyer, coupled with a feeling of guilt for having enough money and not buying the best products for his loved ones.
Promotion of a healthy lifestyle is sometimes also built using the theory of cognitive dissonance. For example, shocking data on the number of deaths from AIDS at one time forced many to choose safe sex and start buying condoms.
In addition, practicing psychologists often cause cognitive dissonance in their clients. Why are they doing that? To show that some of the client’s beliefs are not true and greatly interfere with his life.
Conclusion
Cognitive dissonance very often becomes a companion in a person’s life. Its significance is great, although very often it remains unconscious. However, dissonance can be useful: it accompanies a situation of choice and can become an impetus for a person to take action or make serious changes.
Cognitive dissonance theory is one of the psychological theories about attitude change. It argues that a person behaves in a way that maximizes the internal consistency of his cognitive system. Groups also try to maximize the internal consistency of their members' relationships.
Leon Festinger in his laboratory, 1959
In addition to the theory of cognitive dissonance by L. Festinger (1957), there is a similar theory of balance by Heider (1946), as well as the corresponding theories of Osgood and Tannenbaum (1955). However, cognitive dissonance theory as a distinct branch of psychology has been the most influential for decades. One of the most attractive aspects of this theory is that it offered simple, intuitive hypotheses that were often confirmed.
The basic principle of the theory: two cognitive elements (thoughts, opinions, beliefs) are in a dissonant relationship if one of the sides directly follows from the other. Since dissonance is psychologically uncomfortable, its existence motivates the individual to reduce it and achieve harmony (consonance). Further, if dissonance exists, the person will actively avoid situations and information that can generate it.
The theory of cognitive dissonance has been repeatedly criticized for its incomprehensibility, vague terminology, and the like. Indeed, it is more appropriate to view this theory as more problematic than affirmative. The experimental methodology used to prove it was also criticized for its artificiality, the possibility of discrepancies and questionable external validity, and ignoring individual characteristics.
In his main work, “The Theory of Cognitive Dissonance,” Festinger formulates its starting points as follows: the main idea of the theory is that the human body strives to establish internal harmony. This is consistency, consistency between your thoughts, abilities, knowledge and values. That is, a living organism is aimed at consistency within cognitive (cognitive) activity. In order to operate perfectly with this concept (“coherence”), Festinger interprets cognitive activity as one that is decomposed into elements, or, finally, as a set of such elements.
Festinger offers theoretical statements regarding the relationships between cognitive elements:
- a pair of elements can exist in relationships that are irrelevant or relevant to the case (situation or object);
- in relations of consistency or inconsistency;
- two recognizable elements are in a state of isolation (irrelevance) if they have no relation to each other;
- two recognizable elements are in a dissonant relationship if there is dissonance for each of them separately, when each element excludes or opposes the other;
- two recognizable elements are in a consonantal relationship if one element complements or follows from the other.
Based on these definitions, Festinger establishes the following forms of cognitive dissonance.
- Dissonance almost always occurs after a decision has been made between two or more alternatives. After all, the solution is not the elimination of the opposite, but its pushing aside. It is the concentration of attention on one side of the alternative. We are talking only about the mental delay of the undesirable side of the alternative, but “in itself” it continues to exist. This repression into the unconscious reveals a process that has become the main focus of psychoanalysis. Cognitive elements that correspond to the positive characteristic of the rejected alternative, and those that correspond to the negative characteristic of the chosen alternative, are dissonant with the knowledge of the action that was carried out. Those negative elements that correspond to the positive characteristic of the chosen alternative and the negative characteristic of the rejected alternative are consonant with the cognitive elements corresponding to the action that was accepted.
- Dissonance almost always arises after an attempt at choice, with the prospect of reward or punishment due to the type (character) of behavior being carried out, which differs from one or another initial thought. If such behavior has been successfully carried out, the individual's individual opinion is dissonant with her knowledge regarding her behavior; Moreover, her knowledge about the reward received or about the prevention of punishment is consonant with her knowledge about her behavior. If the behavior was not successful, dissonance occurs.
- Purposeful or random access to new information can create cognitive elements that are dissonant with existing knowledge.
- The manifestation of open disagreement in a group leads to the emergence of cognitive dissonance among group members.
This theory initially captivates with its unconstrained simplicity, almost truisms, but subsequently it is addressed as such, which contains real scientific and philosophical generalizations. Historian of psychology M. Hunt notes in this regard that it was, without a doubt, the most influential theory in social psychology from the late 1950s to the early 70s. Gradually it lost its position, and today it is only generally known knowledge, but not an area of active scientific research.
Cognitive dissonance theory states that a person experiences tension and discomfort when he has incongruent, inconsistent ideas (for example, “so-and-so is a talkative, boring person, but I need him as a friend and accomplice”) and strives to find ways to reduce this dissonance (“he is not bad as you know him to be” or “I don’t really need him, I can get something without him”, etc.).
In 1930, K. Lewin came close to this phenomenon when he examined how a person's inclinations could be changed by his membership in a group that makes a decision, and how such a person could stick to that decision while ignoring later information that conflicted with it. Lewin's student Festinger took this line of research further, developing his theory of cognitive dissonance.
Festinger's first experiment in cognitive dissonance was a 1954 research project in which he and two University of Minnesota students acted as secret agents for seven weeks. They read in the newspapers about an incident involving Mrs. Keech (not her real name), a housewife who lived near Minneapolis. This woman claimed that about a year ago she received a message from a higher being, whom she identified as a guardian from the planet Clarion (he announced himself in the form of an automatic letter that the woman wrote while in a trance). On December 21, the message said, a great flood would cover the Northern Hemisphere, and everyone who lived there, except for a select few, would be destroyed.
Festinger, who was developing his theory at this time, and his younger colleagues saw an extremely convenient opportunity to observe cognitive dissonance “first hand.”
Psychologists felt that Mrs. Keech's public statement and subsequent events must be an invaluable demonstration of cognitive dissonance in real life - the development of a paradoxical response to a contradictory reality. They developed a plan according to which Mrs. Keech was supposed to communicate in a small hut with everyone who believed in this prophecy and would like to wait with her for the next messages from the planet Clarion. This audience included three researchers and five student assistants. Under the guise of believers, they attended their meetings sixty times over seven weeks. The research was extremely physically and emotionally grueling - partly due to the need to hide my reaction to the absurdity of what was happening.
Finally, Mrs. Keech received the message she had been waiting for: a spaceship would arrive at a certain place at a certain time to save the believers. However, the ship did not arrive, and December 21st arrived without any consequences.
In the end, the woman received another message: they say, thanks to the goodness and light created by believers, God decided to cancel the misfortunes and take pity on this world. Some of the new cult's adherents, particularly those who initially doubted it and could not come to terms with the collapse that had occurred in their own faith, left the cult and disappeared. But those who deeply devoted themselves to this belief, abandoned all their occupations and even sold their property in anticipation of the end of the world - they behaved as the researchers expected. They became even more convinced of the existence of aliens and prophecies than Mrs. Keech herself. The revelation did not hinder their faith, but only strengthened it. This eliminated the internal conflict between what they believed in and the reality that brought disappointment.
In 1959, Festinger and his colleague J. Carlsmith conducted a study that is now considered a classic cognitive experiment. Its essence was that scientists, resorting to almost artistic tricks, tried to reduce the dissonance of the experiment participants.
Festinger and Carlsmith asked the couple to perform an extremely boring task: they had to place a dozen hairpins on a tray and remove them from it within half an hour. After the pair finished, one of the researchers told them that the purpose of the experiment was to explore how interest in a task causes a certain effect. The spouses then had to tell the next subjects what was enjoyable about the task, and also specifically emphasize the interest and enjoyment of the task. Next, these spouses were involved in the next stage of the experiment, where they had to act as research assistants. For this, a monetary reward was offered - 1 or 20 dollars. Next, all participants in the experiment had to admit that their words about the “interesting” task were an obvious deception for the next test subject. After this, the final subject was asked how enjoyable it was for him to perform this task.
Since the task was truly unbearably boring, lying to anyone else was to create a condition of cognitive dissonance (“I lied to someone else. However, I’m not that kind of person”). The key question was whether the amount of payment the subjects received would influence the means they used to alleviate dissonance. Those who received $20, a significant sum at the time, were expected to be more willing to change their minds than those who received one dollar. However, Festinger and Carlsmith predicted the opposite. Subjects who received $20 considered the money to be a substantial reward for the experiment, which meant they were quick to agree to publicly confirm their lie.
But those who received one dollar had such little justification for their lies that they felt cognitive dissonance and could only alleviate it by convincing themselves that the task was actually interesting.
As already noted, the theory of cognitive dissonance has been repeatedly criticized. Meanwhile, a stream of experiments has shown that cognitive dissonance must be qualified as meaningful and really existing. And, moreover, as a mature theory.
In his memoirs, the famous social psychologist Elronson wrote: “... We can create ten good hypotheses in the course of an evening... the kind of hypotheses, none of which a person had even dreamed of several years earlier, but we rarely do this. It is this fact that significantly elevates the status of theories that receive thorough confirmation in practice.”
The theory of cognitive dissonance explained some features of social behavior that had not previously been considered by behaviorists. Here are some examples supported by experiment.
- The stronger the group membership becomes, the higher the group is rated by the individual.
- We dislike what hurts us, instead of believing that the pain was a valuable experience.
- Those who smoke usually say that the link between smoking and cancer has not been proven.
- Students who cheat on an exam say that everyone else is cheating too, and they do it to avoid being disadvantaged.
- People who hold opposing views tend to interpret the same facts in completely different ways. Each remembers only what supports his position, “brings shine to the surface” and forgets what could create dissonance.
- If people who think they are smart are forced to hurt others (as soldiers did to civilians during war), they reduce dissonance by humiliating the vanquished.
- If someone benefits from social injustice by causing the suffering of others, he convinces himself that those suffering are themselves to blame, they could have lived better, that this is their fate, etc.
Here is another example of a “natural experiment” that illustrates the human desire to regulate cognitive dissonance through rationalization.
After the 1983 California earthquake struck the city of Santa Cruz, Commissioner Stevens was called in under a new California law to assess the damage to local homes. He identified 175 buildings that had very severe damage. The city council, implicitly wanting to avoid the amount of expensive work, rejected this dissonant information and discounted it. Stevens was called an alarmist, and his report about the threat to the city was rejected. Also, no measures were taken. And soon a seven-magnitude earthquake struck the Santa Cruz area again. Three hundred houses were destroyed and a thousand were seriously damaged, five people were killed and two thousand were injured.
Because of its explanatory power, the theory of cognitive dissonance has successfully survived all attacks. And only one critical reproach she could not easily challenge. This is a question of research ethics. Although scientists always invited volunteers, they offered them morally difficult experiments without their consent, which could harm their self-esteem. True, after the experiment, the researchers explained to them that hiding the truth was necessary for scientific purposes. But an unethical remedy does not become ethical. Such problems were not unique to dissonance theory. They also existed in other social psychological studies.
Romenets V.A., Manokha I.P. History of psychology of the 20th century. - Kyiv, Lybid, 2003.
Cognitive theories of motivation, which are being intensively developed at present, originate from the well-known works of L. Festinger (Festinger L. A., 1957). He owns the theory of cognitive dissonance. This theory has two fundamental advantages that distinguish a good theory from a bad one, a scientific theory from an unscientific one.
First, it proceeds from “the most general principles,” to use Einstein’s expression.
Secondly, from these general principles, consequences are derived that can be subjected to experimental verification. Due to these circumstances, Festinger's work gave rise to a huge number of experimental studies and entire research programs, which resulted in the discovery of a mass of new - sometimes paradoxical - effects and patterns of both theoretical and practical interest.
By cognitive dissonance, Festinger understood some contradiction between two or more cognitions. Cognition is interpreted by Festinger quite broadly: cognition is any knowledge, opinion or belief concerning the environment, oneself or one’s own behavior. Dissonance is experienced by the individual as a state of discomfort. She strives to get rid of it and restore internal cognitive harmony. And it is this desire that is a powerful motivating factor in human behavior and attitude towards the world.
A state of dissonance between cognitions X and Y occurs when cognition X does not imply Y. A state of consonance between X and Y, on the other hand, exists when X implies Y. A person strives for internal consistency, a state of consonance. For example, a person prone to obesity decided to go on a diet (cognition X), but cannot deny himself his favorite chocolate (cognition Y). A person trying to lose weight should not eat chocolate. There is dissonance. Its occurrence motivates a person to reduce, remove, and reduce dissonance. To do this, according to Festinger, a person has three main ways: change one of the cognitions (in this case, stop eating chocolate or stop dieting); reduce the significance of the cognitions included in the dissonant relationship (decide that being overweight is not such a big sin or that chocolate does not cause significant weight gain); add a new cognition (for example, that although chocolate increases weight, it has a beneficial effect on mental activity).
Cognitive dissonance motivates, requires its reduction, leads to a change in attitudes, and ultimately to a change in behavior. Let's consider the two most well-known effects associated with the emergence and removal of cognitive dissonance. One of them arises in a situation of behavior that contradicts a person’s evaluative attitude towards something (attitude). If a person voluntarily (without coercion) agrees to do something that is somewhat inconsistent with his beliefs, opinion, and if this behavior does not have sufficient external justification (say, reward), then in the future beliefs and opinions change towards greater compliance with the behavior. If, for example, a person agreed to behavior that is somewhat contrary to his moral guidelines, then the consequence of this will be dissonance between knowledge about behavior and moral guidelines, and in the future the latter will change in the direction of lowering morality.
Another well-studied effect found in cognitive dissonance research is dissonance after a difficult decision. A difficult decision is the case when the alternative options from which a choice must be made are close in attractiveness. In such cases, as a rule, after making a decision, after the choice is made, a person experiences cognitive dissonance, which is the result of the following contradictions: on the one hand, there are negative features in the chosen option, and on the other hand, there is something positive in the rejected option . What is accepted is partly bad, but it is accepted. What is rejected is partly good, but it is rejected.
Experimental studies of the consequences of a difficult decision have shown that after making such a decision (over time), the subjective attractiveness of the chosen option increases and the subjective attractiveness of the rejected one decreases. A person, thus, gets rid of cognitive dissonance: he convinces himself that what he chose is not just slightly better than the rejected one, but much better, he, as it were, expands alternative options: the chosen one pulls up the scale of attractiveness, the rejected one - down . Based on this, we can assume that difficult decisions increase the likelihood of behavior consistent with the chosen option. For example, if a person was tormented for a long time by choosing between cars “A” and “B”, and in the end preferred “B”, then in the future the probability of choosing cars of type “B” will be higher than before the purchase, since the relative attractiveness of the latter will increase.
Cognitive dissonance theory . The founder of cognitive theories of motivation is L. Festinger. He owns the theory of cognitive dissonance. This theory has at least two fundamental advantages. First, it starts from “the most general principles,” to use Einstein’s expression. Secondly, from these general principles, consequences are derived that can be subjected to experimental verification. Due to these circumstances, Festinger's work gave rise to a huge number of experimental studies and entire research programs, which resulted in the discovery of a mass of new effects and patterns of both theoretical and practical interest.
Under cognitive dissonance Festinger understood some contradiction between two or more cognitions. Cognition is interpreted by Festinger quite broadly: cognition is any knowledge, opinion or belief concerning the environment, oneself or one’s own behavior. Dissonance is experienced by the individual as a state of discomfort; she strives to get rid of it and restore internal cognitive harmony. And it is this desire that is a powerful motivating factor in human behavior and attitude towards the world.
Cognitive dissonance motivates, requires its reduction, leads to a change in attitudes, and ultimately to a change in behavior.
Balance theory . Another well-known example of cognitive theories of motivation is balance theory F. Haider.
Heider described a social situation as a collection of elements (people and objects) and connections between them. Certain combinations of elements and connections are stable and balanced, while others are unbalanced. People tend to strive for balanced, harmonious, consistent situations. Unbalanced situations, like cognitive dissonance, cause feelings of discomfort, tension and a desire to bring the situation into balance. Thus, one of the sources of human behavior, according to Heider, is the need for harmonious, consistent social relationships. A position of imbalance initiates behavior aimed at restoring balance.
As the simplest social situation, Heider considers a system consisting of three elements (triad): subject - another person - object, together with the relationships between them: 1. subject - another person. 2.subject - object. 3. another person is an object. In this case, the object is understood very broadly: as a thing, a process, a group of people, an object, an idea, etc. Relationships within the triad can be positive and negative.
Haider also identified three main ways to relieve imbalance in relationships:
1) change one of the relations from “+” to “-” or from “-” to “+”.
2) reduce the significance of one of the relations, i.e. reduce one of the relations to zero.
3. differentiate between positive and negative attitudes.
29. Approaches to motivation of behavior in humanistic psychology. Hierarchy of needs by A. Maslow.
Founder of humanistic psychology - Abraham Maslow.
The basis of the theories is the uniqueness and freedom of choice of the individual.
Maslow, Abraham:
1. Education and social norms force people to forget about their feelings and needs and accept the values imposed by others.
2. A person’s needs are “given” and hierarchically organized.
Hierarchy of needs (pyramid):
5 - Related self-actualization, = needs of personal wealth.
4 - Related respect others and self-respect.
3 - Related love and acceptance(the need to love and be loved).
2 - Related security(predictability, order, certainty).
1 - Basic physiological needs (food, sleep, sex).
The needs that lie at the base of the pyramid must be satisfied before the higher ones, because you may not even suspect their existence. The higher a person climbs the ladder of needs, the more humanity and individuality he will show.
Personal development - this is an increase in understanding of one’s “real self”, one’s capabilities, characteristics, allowing a person to achieve an understanding of oneself, the meaning of life, internal harmony and self-actualization(key word theory).
Promote development: self-actualization in the chosen business, devotion to it; active position in relation to reality; overcoming reality, not escaping from it;