In the book,
Converging Media: A New Introduction to Mass Communication, the theory of
cognitive dissonance is described as a theory of persuasion that states we act
first and then rationalize our behavior afterward, in order to fit our actions
into self-perceived notions of who we are. This theory helps explain a range of puzzling
behaviors, including why college students subject themselves to things like
hazing to join a fraternity or sorority
The term
“cognitive dissonance” was coined in 1957 by Leon Festinger,
an American social psychologist.
He coined this term while doing a participant
observation study of a cult that believed that the earth was going to be
destroyed by a flood. Festinger’s cognitive dissonance theory suggests that all
humans have an inner drive to hold all our attitudes and beliefs in harmony and
feel positive within our own-selves, so we can avoid disharmony. More
specifically, cognitive dissonance refers to a situation involving conflicting
beliefs or attitudes in which produces an internal discomfort. Naturally, we
try to fix this discomfort by altering our attitudes, behaviors, and beliefs.
College students
who put themselves through hazing to join a fraternity most likely go through
cognitive dissonance.
When they are forced to do an action they do not want to
do, such as binge drinking, dissonance is created between their cognition and
their behavior. The individual is going through forced compliance because he or
she is performing actions that are inconsistent with his or her beliefs. After
the behavior occurs (in this case, binge drinking), the behavior cannot be
change since it is in the past, so dissonance will need to be reduced by
re-evaluating their attitude to what they have done. They might rationalize by telling themselves it will all be worth it in the end, that it will make them have a lot of friends, or that it will help them make great networking connections for the future.
Similarly, cognitive
dissonance has been used to control large populations. An example in the past
was in World War II where campaigns were made to tell the American people to
donate their pots and pans, which were said to have been used to make
ammunition, tanks, and planes. People’s dissonance of giving up their
possessions was then rationalized with feelings of nationalism for the war
effort.
Cognitive
dissonance is also used in advertising and marketing.
Advertisers want
to create dissonance for non-users of their product. Advertisers believe that a consumer may uses a
particular product because he or she believes the advertising for that product,
which claims that the product is the best of its kind. Other ways companies use
the theory of cognitive dissonance to get people to like or buy their product is
by getting their logo or brand name on a positive image. Some examples of this
are companies such as Under Armour who advertises their products with the
wounded warrior project and Starbuck’s partnership with Product RED to help
people living with HIV or Aids in Africa. Dissonance may be created in people
after they spend $7 on a cup of coffee at Starbucks. This is because
realistically paying such a large amount on a cup of coffee is ridiculous.
However, people are more willing to pay
$6 or $7 for a cup of coffee if they can rationalize their purchase by changing their thinking to relieve that discomfort by telling
themselves their money is going to a good cause.
A similar organization that
causes dissonance in their advertisements is TOMS.
TOMS started out as a shoe company
with the commitment to change lives. They have a ‘One to One’ promise, with the
commitment to help one person every time one of their products are purchased. If you
purchase a pair of shoes from them they will make shoes specifically designed
for a child in another country to wear them. Shoe distribution is also paired
with education of hygiene and healthy behaviors. TOMS have even recently
started selling eyewear as well, with the ‘ONE to One’ promise to help people
in need of prescription glasses, medical treatment, and sight-saving surgery. In
my opinion, when looking at the products they sell, the price tag does not
match up with the quality of the product. They sell their products anywhere
from $50 to $90 for a flimsy canvas pair of shoes. However, when deciding
whether to buy a pair, cognitive dissonance occurs inside your head. Dissonance
comes form the two conflicting decision paths. The cognitive dissonance theory
says that the outcome of these opposing paths, whether to buy the pair of
shoes, will be the one that requires the least emotional stress. Therefore,
more people are willing to spend the extra money for a pair of TOMS shoes if
they know the money is going to help people. This is how TOMS have been able to make a lot of business over the years.
I think that you did a good job explaining what cognitive dissonance is, being that people often hold two or more conflicting ideas that they must alter to avoid disharmony. I think you also provided really good examples of cognitive dissonance, such as hazing and the Toms company. In terms of hazing, I definitely think that people not only justify themselves getting hazed, but also justify hazing others. Some of the nicest people participate in hazing others in the cruelest ways. It may seem uncharacteristic of them, but they find a way to rationalize it in their own minds to be okay so they do not feel poorly about themselves. I think that TOMS is a good example of when companies use cognitive dissonance to better their sales. I personally have a pair of TOMS, and I know from experience that these are not the most well made shoes, yet when I purchased them for fifty dollars, I told myself it was worth it because I would be helping someone else. It makes me question how much these shoes actually cost to make and whether people would still be buying them if TOMS did not give shoes out to the needy. Overall, I think it is very strategic for companies to do this.
ReplyDeleteCognitive dissonance is something many people experience one time or another in their life. For me, I can definitely relate to this post as I joined a sorority. While I was not hazed, we were expected to attend several meetings, philanthropy events, and put a great deal of time into the sorority. At the time, I had schoolwork, club meetings, and many other responsibilities. While the time commitment was frustrating I really wanted to be a part of my sorority and therefore had cognitive dissonance. It is very interesting to relate this feeling to advertising. Advertisers use cognitive dissonance to get non-users to use their product. I found the example of Starbuck’s partnering with Product RED to help people living with HIV or Aids in Africa very interesting. One would not normally think that coffee and helping African children would go hand in hand. However, advertisers positioned Starbucks in such a way that people felt that by drinking and buying Starbucks coffee they were also helping people with AIDS. Consumers may think of this as a scheme, however I believe it is the job of advertisers to do whatever they can in order to promote their product. In this case buying Starbucks goes to a good cause, which is a win-win for people who feel strongly about the cause and Starbucks as their sales will increase.
ReplyDeleteWe encountered a lot of cognitive dissonance when it came to our campaign for our right to have fluoride free water in Ireland. As our information conflicted with existing views, there was the usual"eyes glazing over syndrome". To combat cognitive dissonance we created a campaign that was fun, exciting and non-threatening. Our reach expanded exponentially so much so that our campaign against water fluoridation was regarded as one of the best in the world. www.thegirlagainstfluoride.com. We continue to educate on social media forums such as facebook where more and more people come on board each week. There is a way to get beyond cognitive dissonance and that is to present information in a way that appeals to the imagination and that leads people to question.
ReplyDelete