#130 - Carol Tavris, Ph.D. & Elliot Aronson, Ph.D.: Recognizing and overcoming cognitive dissonance

KEYPOINTS

• 01

  Cognitive dissonance is the discomfort of holding two contradictory thoughts, and we reduce it to protect our self-image

  Carol Tavris and Elliot Aronson co-wrote 'Mistakes Were Made (But Not by Me)' (2007). Aronson trained with Leon Festinger at Stanford in the mid-1950s and is listed among the 100 most eminent psychologists of the 20th century. His contribution was to see that the most painful dissonance is with the belief that 'I am a good, kind, smart person.' We often justify a bad act rather than revise that self-concept.

• 02

  The theory began with frightening rumours after an earthquake in India

  Festinger studied rumours after a major earthquake. At the epicentre, people spread comforting rumours that help was coming. In a city 15–20 miles away with only mild damage, people spread rumours of a coming typhoon and floods. Festinger concluded that people who felt very anxious with little visible reason adopted beliefs that justified their anxiety.

• 03

  Paying people less makes them believe their lie more

  In Festinger's experiment, participants did a boring task, then told the next person it was interesting, for either $20 or $1. The behaviourist theory of reinforcement predicted the more you're paid, the more you'd like it. Dissonance theory predicted the opposite. Those paid $20 could think they'd sold their soul for a good price. Those paid $1 had to convince themselves the task wasn't so dull after all.

• 04

  The pyramid: small first steps drive people apart

  Two people with nearly identical beliefs face a hard choice, such as whether to cheat on an exam. Each justifies their choice, and justification changes their attitude, so they slide down opposite sides of a pyramid until they barely recognise each other. Attia calls it path dependency. The hard part is climbing back up. A Stuyvesant High School student caught among 71 exchanging answers redefined cheating as 'taking a risk'.

• 05

  Smart, powerful people are the most dangerous dissonance reducers

  Prosecutors who sent a man away for 25 years may reject DNA evidence of his innocence and keep him in prison, not because they're evil but because they see themselves as good. One prosecutor's theory shifted from 'he was the rapist' to an unnamed accomplice once the semen didn't match. The authors also discuss the Amanda Knox and Duke lacrosse cases, where about 80 faculty signed a newspaper ad before the facts were in.

• 06

  Outrage can override skepticism

  In the 1980s McMartin preschool abuse case, Attia notes that this case really challenged Tavris. He quotes a line from their discussion of it: 'we sacrificed our skepticism at the altar of outrage.' The broader lesson is to withhold judgement in sensational cases. A related exercise: imagine a person you despise in 10 poses, and you'll find a negative story for every one.

• 07

  Ideology distorts science and memory

  The recovered-memory era produced patients who emerged from therapy believing they had dozens or even hundreds of personalities. Tavris notes that events from 25 years ago that seemed benign at the time can be reinterpreted as traumatic. Attia, who trusted his detailed memory, was shaken to learn that memory is reconstructive.

• 08

  Certainty freezes the ability to change your mind

  Anyone who is totally certain has almost certainly lost the ability to update. Attia argues for tying decisions to behaviour ('with these facts, I'll do this') rather than identity, so new evidence doesn't feel like a personal attack. The scientific habit of 'rooting for the null hypothesis' is hard but necessary.

• 09

  Institutional cultures entrench dissonance

  Officers may justify planting evidence on suspects they 'know' are guilty. The authors say it may be understandable but is never justified. They cite the claim that 20–25% of US police officers come from the military, and the bystander culture that shields the most brutal cop. Attia points to Mark Fuhrman from the O.J. Simpson trial as where small justifications can lead years later.

• 10

  Brain-imaging studies seduce us

  Tavris cites research showing the same lecture is judged more scientific when it includes fMRI images. She describes Drew Westen's studies of partisans facing damaging information about their own party's candidate. Bad behaviour from the other side is consonant, while from our own side it gets explained away.