Disonance Theory: The Validity Of Cognitive Dissonance

938 Words2 Pages

The validity of cognitive dissonance is the fact that we are faced with it every day, by making a decision or solving a problem using our subjective values which include beliefs, opinions, attitudes, etc. An attitude describes the positive or negative feelings we have toward people, things, or ideas. As humans, what we do to make these decisions and solve these problems don't always line up, causing inconsistency. This means our beliefs go one way, and our behavior goes in the opposite direction. When we decide to change our subjective value, then the dissonance is resolved. #1 The validity of cognitive dissonance is the fact that we are faced with it every day, by making a decision or solving a problem using our subjective values which include …show more content…

The level of dissonance a person is experiencing, if any, is the main objective of the theory. If there is a person who does not feel psychologically uncomfortable with cognitive dissonance, the theory will not apply. Worldview 1 also includes a testable hypothesis, and Leon Festinger had three. The hypotheses for cognitive dissonance theory are mental mechanisms people use to ensure their actions and attitudes are synchronized (griffin, 2015, p. 202), and the objective experiment is to present evidence that will prove those hypotheses. The first hypothesis stated that selective dissonance prevents dissonance. “Not only do we tend to listen to opinions and select reading materials that are consistent with our existing beliefs, we usually choose to be with people who are like us. By taking care to “stick with our own kind” (Griffin, 2015, p. 202). Hypothesis two is post decision dissonance creates a need for reassurance. Everyone has tried to convince themselves, maybe after buying a car, that they have made the right decision. Three conditions heighten post decision dissonance: (1) the more important the issue, (2) the longer an individual delays in choosing between two equally attractive options, and (3) the greater the difficulty involved in reversing the decision once it’s been made. Hypothesis three, minimal Justification for action induces attitude

Open Document