Rubber Band Bracelets
Men and women naturally act in ways that is consistent with their cognitions (beliefs, attitudes, and values). Therefore, when individuals behave in a fashion that is inconsistent with one of these cognitions, they fall into scenario of discomfort. In this an uncomfortable state, they’ll naturally be inclined to adjust their behaviors or attitudes to regain mental and emotional consistency. When our beliefs, attitudes, and actions mesh, we live harmoniously. After they don’t, we feel dissonance at some level–that is, we’re feeling awkward, uncomfortable, unsettled, disturbed, upset, nervous, or confused. As a way to eliminate or reduce such tension, we’re going to you must do everything easy to change our attitudes and behavior, and sometimes it means doing something we don’t want to do.
Leon Festinger formulated the cognitive dissonance theory in 1957 at Stanford University. He asserted, “When attitudes conflict with actions, attitudes or beliefs, were uncomfortable and motivated to try and change.” Festinger’s theory sets the inspiration to the Law of Dissonance, one of several twelve laws of Maximum Influence.
Suppose there’s a big rubberband inside your body. When dissonance exists, the rubber band actually starts to stretch. As long as the dissonance exists, the group stretches tighter and tighter. You’ve got to do something before it reaches a breaking point and snaps. The motivation to cut back the strain ‘s what causes us to change; we will you must do everything inside our power to return in balance. We seek psycho-emotional stasis at all times, similar to we experience the ever-present, driving need for water and food to satisfy our physical being.
When we feel cognitive dissonance, we need to be capable of cope with the psychological tension. We have an arsenal of tools at our disposal to assist us resume cognitive consistency. The following outlines various ways people attempt to reduce dissonance.
* Denial–To inwardly smile at the dissonance, you deny there’s a problem. You are doing this either by ignoring or demeaning the source in the information. You might also deliberately misperceive the confronting position.
* Modify–You improve your existing cognitions to accomplish consistency. More often than not this involves admitting you are wrong and making changes to treat your errors.
* Reframe–You alter your understanding or interpretation in the meaning. This leads that you either modify your individual thinking or devalue the value of the entire matter, great deal of thought unimportant altogether.
* Search–You are going to find a flaw within the other side’s position, to discredit the source, and to seek social or evidentiary support for your own viewpoint. You might attempt to convince the origin (if available) of his error. You might also try and convince others in college what’s right.
* Separation–You separate the attitudes which are incompatible. This compartmentalizes your cognitions, making it simpler that you should ignore and even neglect the discrepancy. In your head, what happens a single part of your daily life (or another person’s) shouldn’t modify the other parts of your life. (Blame)
* Rationalization–You find excuses why the inconsistency is acceptable. You modify your expectations or attempt to alter what really happened. You also find good reasons to justify what you do or your opinions.
Most of us feel more harmony inside our lives when everything is consistent: our jobs, our homes, our habits, even our soda pops. Consistency could be the glue that holds everything in our way of life together, thereby allowing us to deal with the planet. Consider all the people you admire. I’ll wager, by and large, a lot of them are consistent, congruent people. What you believe, what you say, as well as what they actually do (regardless if no one is watching) flow together seamlessly. Typically, an increased a higher level such consistency in one’s our life is an indication of personal and intellectual strength. People are naturally more inclined–even subconsciously–to gravitate toward and follow traders who are consistent of their behavior. The converse often happens too: Inconsistency in one’s personal and professional every day life is generally considered undesirable. The individual whose beliefs, words, and deeds don’t consistently match up is seen as hypocritical, two-faced, confused, or perhaps mentally ill.