home

=**Cognitive Dissonance **= =** Theory **= = = = = = =


 * By: Amanda Setter. Lola Smith. Brent Stalley. Trevor Straub. **
 *  Maria Taravella. Donald Townsend. Emily Trevisan. **

Cognitive dissonance theory is when a person is holding two conflicting beliefs about the same idea at the same time. The cognitive aspect is the person’s beliefs and opinions. The dissonance in the equation is that a person holds an inconsistency between their attitude and their behavior. In order to get rid of the dissonance, something must change, either their behavior or their attitude to match their beliefs or opinions. Unfortunately, people undergo this cognitive dissonance theory in their everyday life, whether it be on the subject of smoking, cheating on a test, making a purchase, or even donating to a good cause. One of the ways to handle the cognitive dissonance in a person's life is if the person changes their behavior or justifies their behavior by changing the conflicting cognition. The person can also justify their behavior by adding new cognitions. In almost all decisions made, cognitive dissonance is present.
 * Overview **
 * What is the theory trying to explain? What is the context in which the theory was developed? **

Cognitive dissonance theory was developed by Leon Festinger in his book "When Prophecy Fails" in 1956. Festinger first was interested in writing the book because he read a newspaper about a UFO cult that thinks the world is going to end soon. The cognitive dissonance theory was developed once Festinger engaged in a woman who was receiving information about UFOs on a planet titled Clarion. The woman named Mary revealed that the messages meant the world was going to come to an end due to a flood on December 21, 1954. Mary was part of the scientology cult in her community that her husband was known as the founder of the scientology cult. Many people then began to follow Mary and her husband's scientology cult resulting in the followers quitting their jobs and dropping out of college to meet the UFOs on the planet Clarion in a flying saucer. As these people believed the flood was going to come, when the great flood never came, or members decided to leave, "fringe" members were able to let these concepts go. Although the "flood" never came, "committed" members reinterpreted the new evidence they'd learned to show that they were right all along.

**Definition:** the psychological phenomenon of discomfort felt at discrepancy between what you know/believe and new information integration or interpretation. This causes some people to resist learning new things. When experiences have been difficult, uncomfortable or humiliating enough, people are less likely to concede that the content learned is useless, pointless or valueless.  The more difficult the course, the more likely the participants will view favorably or see value.  The more expensive the course the same is true.  The more obscure and convoluted the subject, the more profound it must be.
 *  Lessons: **

= =  Origins of Cognitive Dissonance Theory =media type="youtube" key="korGK0yGIDo?fs=1" height="346" width="432" = The start of Cognitive Dissonance began with Festinger in the 1950’s. This theory began to explain cognitive dissonance that is the feeling of uncomfortable tension which comes from holding two conflicting thoughts in the mind at the same time. Dissonance is experienced as guilt, anger, frustration, or even embarrassment.
 * Evolution of Cognitive dissonance **

One of Festinger’s first experiments with cognitive dissonance happens to be the experiment with the classic experiment by Festinger & Carlsmith, 1959 (Boring task experiment). Festinger got participants to lie for 1 dollar saying the assignment was fun even though it was awful. Then there were those who were paid $20 but showed a negative affect towards the experiment because those who were paid $1 manipulated their mindset because they told it was fun. This was one of the first experiments that really kick started the theory of cognitive dissonance.

Free choice paradigm **-** Jack Brehm conducted a study of 225 female students in which he allowed them to choose between two appliances. The participants rated the two appliances before and after making their choice. The ratings showed that the participants raised their ratings of the appliance they chose and lowered the ratings of the item they rejected.

<span style="background-color: #ffce00; font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;">Effort choice <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;">**-** Aronson and Mills conducted a study in which participants underwent mild or severe hazing to become a member of a group. The groups then rated the other members of their group. The severely hazed groups rating were significantly higher because of the increased amount of effort in order to join the group forced them to increase their subjective value of the discussion group in order to resolve the dissonance.

<span style="background-color: #ffce00; font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;">Self Perception Theory <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;">**-** Daryl Bern proposed this alternative explanation, and stated that people infer their attitudes from their behavior. He explained Festinger’s experiment by saying that the participants decided that the task was interesting because that is what they told someone. The people paid 20$ had an external incentive and this is the reason for saying the task was interesting instead of actually finding it interesting.

<span style="background-color: #ffce00; font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;">Self Concept <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;">**-** Elliot Anderson reformulated the theory of Cognitive Dissonace by saying that dissonace occurs not because of conflicting ideas but because people have a positive view of themselves and when their actions are conflicting with this view, dissonance occurs.

<span style="background-color: #ffce00; font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;">Buyer’s remorse <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;">**-** the feeling of regret after making a purchase . This is relevant to the general public however the main issue is more towards entertainment issues. The cost to watch a performer, watch television, buy alcohol and cigarettes just to be entertained does not come free. These items have a price on them. People are greatly effected by money because its an independent variable that is a necessity in our society.
 * <span style="color: #0000ff; font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 150%;">Key concepts **

Adaptive preference formation <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;">**-** after finding that something is unattainable, one reduces dissonance by criticizing it.

<span style="background-color: #ffce00; font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;">Rationalization <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;">**-** The tendency to create additional reasons to support a choice made. Everybody does this on a daily basis by adjusting to their scenario to feel safe and comfortable. People are self conscious about their decision making and rationalize just to feel about their choice.

<span style="background-color: #ffce00; font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;">Conformation Bias <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;">- The tendency for people to favor information or facts that confirm their personal beliefs. The Conformation Bias happens to be very critical to cognitive dissonance because the person feels comfortable when they feel as their action is appropriate. Conformation Bias is relevant to people all over the world because everyone obtains information on a daily basis just so they could accept their belief and move on. <span style="background-color: #ffce00; font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;">Hedonistic Dissonance <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;">**-** Brought upon when people act in a way that has negative consequences for thems <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;">elves. People that smok <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;">e cigarettes know the health risk involved. Nicotine is addictive, and tobacco causes lung cancer. But why do people still do this? Consumers are informed every time they buy a pack of cigarettes that the negative consequences can include addiction, lung cancer, and other health risks. This is one belief that sum up why a number of people smoke cigarettes even though they know they already know the risks involved.

Moral Dissonance - Brought upon when a person acts in a way that has negative consequences for others

Perception - One’s belief may be different than somebody else’s point of view. This is called perception where on person might sees omething differently. This is quite an important concept in Cognitive Dissonance because not everyone has the same point of view. Inexperiments involving participants, they need to be aware of what is real and what is fantasy, what they believe is actuality and right. Examples including Festinger’s “Bor ing experiment,” show the control groups perception when they lied about the task. Perception could be the most important aspect in Cognitive Dissonance because it’s what a person is seeing.

Memory - People need to have a good memory because cognitive dissonance proposes two conflicting ideas at one time. Participants will need to remember both conflicting thoughts. In my personal essay, smokers were involved in a control and non-control group. One was based on an informative setting where the other one presented no content to the participants. The people involved with the experiment need to use their memory to disti nguish the difference between the two settings. Memory happens to be a key aspect of dissonance because without the other thought, the theory would be vanished.



Logical Thinking - Cognitive dissonance addresses the issue of two conflicting thoughts. One reason logical reason is so important to this theory is because problems occur that involve logical thinking to manipulate the difference between facts. The general public needs to be self aware and be able to use logic to make the difference between the two conflicting ideas. By using logical reasoning

The Power of the Media, and Governments have. What the cameras don't show you. <span style="background-color: #ffffff; color: #0061ff; font-family: Verdana,Geneva,sans-serif; font-size: 240%; vertical-align: sub;"> media type="youtube" key="f-d2jCmcGG8?fs=1" height="385" width="480" align="center"

//**<span style="color: #0031ff; font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 32px;">Case Study Summaries **//

//**<span style="color: #008000; font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 140%;">High School Student's Cognitive Dissonance to Cheat. **// //<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;">By: Maria Taravella //

//<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;">The purpose of this cognitive dissonance study is to try and find out whether high school students who participate in a focus-type group with treatments of media aspects will reduce their cheating behavior. The researchers who assessed the study were Edward Vinski and Georgiana Tryon, who are both students at The Graduate School and University Center of the City University of New York. Included in the study was pretesting and post testing in order to measure the experiment. The students, who after being put through an induced focus type group about cheating and knew that cheating was wrong as well as a control group, was given a questionnaire to complete and based on their answers a conclusion was made. The hypothesis that the experimenter’s gathered was that if the students participated in an induced hypocrisy paradigm then it will affect the high school student’s attitudes and behaviors towards cheating. The cognitive dissonance theory comes into play in this study because it is used to affect both behavioral and attitude changes towards cheating. Also, the issue of cheating in high schools has been presented throughout the media and the media has often concluded that, "in spite of all the research and media attention devoted to the problem of cheating within the past 10-15 years, little if any significant progress appears to have been made in abating this troublesome issue" (219). The induced hypocrisy focus group is the cognitive dissonance topic in which the students may believe that some action, or inaction, in this case, cheating is wrong, but they have trouble believing it is their problem as well. A few factors that the experimenter’s relayed which might be a challenge to reduce the students cognitive dissonance is the issue that students who cheat can give explanation for their behavior by attributing it to outside factors such as teacher characteristics and job-related responsibilities. The only way the researchers could conduct this experiment was if the participants overcame the denial of the inconsistency between attitudes and behavior which produces the dissonance and they will have to understand that the problem is their own to correct. //

//<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;"> When it was time for the researchers to conduct their study and chose their participants they chose to use students in grades 7-12 and age 12 to 18 who were enrolled at a private Catholic junior/senior high school in Riverhead, New York. In addition, the school does have a strict Code of Honesty that prohibits cheating in which the students have to promise to uphold once enrolled. The researchers issued a permission slip to all 500 students at the school, but only the students (109) who returned the slip with a parent signature were allowed to participate. Out of the students who participated 52 of them were males and 57 were females. The experimental group and control group was then divided by religion classes. If the student was in religion class then they were considered to be in the experimental group (44 students) while the rest of the students were the control group (65 students). Reason being, the study was not conducted at random assignment because the researchers did not want to disrupt much of school curriculum. The experimental group was the group getting the treatment of the focus type group about cheating. //

//<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;"> The way the researchers examined the cheating rate was by asking the participants of the experimental group and the control group two questions. One was how many tests have they taken since the beginning of the semester? And the second question was how many of those test did they cheat on? As the pretest, to find the result, the number of test taken divided the number of tests cheated on and the answer was the cheating rate of the students. Both the experimental and control group took the pretest. Then the following day only the experimental group participated in the focus type group about establishing a school policy regarding academic dishonesty. The focus type group relayed reasons why cheating was wrong through a process of watching videos, media aspects, about cheating, bu﻿t the participants did not discuss the issues addressed. The researcher instructing the experimental group asked 17 open-ended questions and the participants would write down how they felt about the questions all including cheating and future cheating. The control group answered the same 17-question questionnaire but did not have treatment. Ten weeks later, the same experimental group and control group was asked the same 17 questions and the two questions from the pretest to see if there were any change in attitudes and behavior. The focus groups were timed in a 45-minute period because of the disrupting school issue. //

//<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;"> The results delivered that the hypothesis the researchers developed was wrong. The cheating intervention (focus type group) surfaced with videos about cheating and the fact that media relayed this message of cheating through the videos, produced no positive effects relative to the no-intervention control. The videos seen about cheating and how it is wrong did not effect the students behavior. Another finding was that students indicated that although they participated in cheating, they did not get caught and are not concerned about getting caught. The results also showed that even though the students did not think cheating was good, they would still do so, pertaining to the cognitive dissonance theory. Continuing with the issue that knowing cheating is wrong, but the students did it anyway. //

//<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;"> Vinski and Tyron suggested that further research was necessary. Some of the further research would include different demographics amongst participants, for example, public schooling, adults and different social status. Also because of the time constraint, the students may have answered differently if the focus type groups were longer than 45 minutes. Typically 1.5 hours to 2 hours would be ideal to find further research. In continuation, the videos shown about cheating could also have included other real life situations in the media, such as officials who cheat and get in serious trouble because of their actions. Since the student's attitudes and beliefs did not coincide with their behaviors then the cognitive dissonance is still present. //

Vinski, E., & Tryon, G. (2009). Study of a cognitive dissonance intervention to address high school students' cheating attitudes and behaviors. Ethics & Behavior, 19(3), 218-226. http://library.calstate.edu/sandiego/metasearch/record?group=004350&resultSet=048633&startRecord=5

//__Disengagement Beliefs; Do they influence Cognitive Dissonance?__//

By: Brent Stalley
//   //

media type="youtube" key="jQUNk5meJHs?fs=1" height="268" width="336" align="center"

Cigarettes companies have managed to creative one of the most consumed and addictive products in the history of mankind. Cigarette companies in the past have said, “cigarettes are not addictive.” Obviously that statement has been proven wrong, however there are still the majority of people that smoke cigarettes despise the risk involved. Addictions are hard to quit. Society needs to understand the most efficient and productive way to stop smoking.

The purpose of this study was to illustrate the influential differences of smokers in two different scenarios such as a persuasive message condition or a non-information control condition. The hypothesis in this article was the concern of twelve disengagement beliefs with smokers and if it was a way to reduce cognitive dissonance. The study consisted of 254 smokers who were tested in a controlled and non-controlled situation. The participants were informed of twelve disengagements that basically proved why they smoke cigarettes.



The twelve disengagement beliefs disregarded all health factors and sum up the personal choice for people who smoke cigarettes. From a readers standpoint I feel that if you call somebody out on their addictions like these "disengagement beliefs," that smokers are going to react strongly to the situation in possibility a negative or positive manner. These smokers were tested in a motivating and non-informative setting. The positive scenario basically informed the negative affects of tobacco, and influenced those to quit. Participants were informed of certain health risks, addictions to hopefully contradict their twelve disengagement beliefs. This is known as hedonistic dissonance where someone knows the affect of smoking and risks involved. Someone who smokes cigarettes can be somewhat indecisive because both choices that are being thrown at them. Conformation bias seems relevant in this study due to the informative content distrubted to the group. This influences the partcipant due to the content such as health risks that was provided in the positive setting.

Smokers that are not advocated to quit are probably not going to quit. In the second situation of the experiment the setting condensed of a no-information control that released no content to the participants. Smokers showed both weak and strong reactions. Being in positive and informative setting influences the consumer the risks and health factors involved with smoking cigarettes. However the non-information control setting does not stress, put pressure on the smoker. Smokers feel relaxed and comfortable. Cognitive Dissonance occurs when a a person is feeling unpleasant and one or more variables in the situation have a positive effect. There’s no motivation to change because they're happy and have no desire to quit really. The participant is still aware of the disengagement beliefs and understands them. Even though this creates comfort because there's no pressure this shows a weak impact correlated to smoking because it gives zero reasons why the smoker should quit.

It can be summed up that smokers were influenced to quit by the positive, informative setting. The study also showed that those smokers that experienced a ‘negative reaction’ towards the positive setting showed low signs of quitting. This is the extreme opposite of quitting and relates to the differences in personal choice. People will react in differently even though they are presented the same material in different scenarios. Cognitive dissonance is shown through disengagement beliefs in a positive health controlled situation that influences a group of people rather than a non-controlled.

Dijkstraa, Arie. "Disengagement Beliefs in Smokers: Do They Influence the Effects of a Tailored Persuasive Message Advocating Smoking Cessation?" Blackboard Academic Suite. Sept. 2009. Web. 06 Oct. 2010. <https://blackboard.sdsu.edu/webapps/portal/frameset.jsp?tab_id=_5_1>.

//**<span style="color: #008000; font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 140%;">A Study on Exposure to Attitude-Consistent and Counter Attitudinal Political Information **//

//<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;">By Trevor Straub //

//<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;"> The purpose of this study is to find how the attitudes of people affect the ways they expose themselves to counter attitudinal information. The study also looks to find how political views affect the exposure to information that is not consistent with their own attitudes. This study is heavily involved in testing the Theory of Cognitive Dissonance which states that people are driven to reduce dissonance, by changing their attitudes and beliefs so that they will coincide with others. The study states that people’s attitudes can be measured in extremity, accessibility to information about an attitude, and the certainty or importance of the belief to the individual. The research questions presented in this study look to resolve whether people with extreme beliefs are more likely to avoid counter attitudinal information or if they are able to view this information without their beliefs changing at all. The study also looks at individual’s accessibility to information in order to see how important an issue is, and the reaction to counter attitudinal information that may have not been exposed. People tend to look for both sides of an argument before developing a stance on the issue, yet Cognitive Dissonance theory explains that people will avoid opposing arguments in order to reduce dissonance. This explains why the importance of the attitude is relevant to the study. //

//<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;"> The study was conducted among 156 Communication students at Midwestern University over two sessions in a computer lab. The average age of the participants was twenty two years, and the majority (62%) was female. The first session asked seventeen questions about political issues. In the second session, participants viewed eight fake webpages about the four issues developed from the seventeen questions previously asked. Two of the articles had opposing attitudes on a subject. The participants’ actions were logged by software and then they were asked to complete a questionnaire. //

//<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;"> The study showed that participants were more likely to choose articles with consistent attitudes, and that the times spent on these articles was longer than those of the counter attitudinal attitude. Readers spent 58% of their time on articles with the same attitude as their own. //

//<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;"> This study extended previous research on Festinger’s Theory of Cognitive Dissonance, as well as expanded on the concept of attitude and its strength. The study showed that exposure to attitude-consistent messages was more popular than exposure to counter attitudinal messages and that this pattern was constant in all gauges of exposure used. //

<span style="color: #808080; font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;">Knobloch-Westerwick, Silvia, and Jingbo Meng. "Looking the Other Way." Selective Exposure to Attitude-Consistent and Counterattitudinal Political Information 36.3 (2009): 426-48. //<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;"> []. //

//**<span style="color: #008000; font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 140%;">Cognitive Dissonance after Purchase: A Multidimensional Scale **// //<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;">By: Don Townsend //

//<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;"> The purpose of "Cognitive Dissonance after Purchase: A Multidimensional Scale" became evident when writers Sweeny, Hausknecht, and Soutar reveal that there is not an accurate means to measure the effects of cognitive dissonance, which is described as a psychologically uncomfortable. The focus was on the aspect on purchasing, and how a person felt after the purchase regardless of the consumer’s beliefs about a product or advertisement. The writers after a brief overview of the concept of what their interpretation of cognitive dissonance, they point out that the cognitive dissonance not only is cognitive in nature, but also has an emotional component that plays a crucial role in the forethought of the purchase. Perhaps advertisements and companies can use this idea to make consumers feel better about their purchase and associate that feeling with their company. //

//<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;">The issue that the writers brought up that prior to the the submission of this piece, there has not been any way to accurately measure the level of cognitive dissonance people feel after they make a purchase. Cognitive dissonance does not always have to be a disagreement of opinion, but it can also be a battle against one's own self. Based on previous experiences, gut feelings, seeing a product advertised somewhere else for cheaper, financial state, to name a few, all present conflict to a consumer once a product has been purchased. So what the writers aim to do is form a measure to the extent of after purchase cognitive dissonance by correlating external factors. The potential for the scale these researches create will provide a measurable table that companies and media firms alike to see what goes through the minds of consumers after purchase regarding a conflict of what just had transpired. //

//<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;"> Sweeny, Hausknecht, and Soutar hypothesized that they “… could establish the content of dissonance and to validate the scale psychometrically and theoretically”, and would do so by collecting data and running cross tabulations and correlation analysis. 645 students were used for the research. The sample population came from four universities in Australia. They focused on three cognitive conditions of dissonance and one emotional condition. The cognitive conditions included: whether the right choice was made, whether the product was really needed at all, and concern over the deal (focused on the salesperson, or media that caused buying behavior). The data collection was primarily in the form of a survey in order to have such a large sample. //

//<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;"> The researchers found significance with all three cognitive conditions with emotion, which were all highly correlated. They found their data to be supported and valid by surveying another 128 people who just made purchases at a car electronics location, and a furniture store. The data proves that people have second thoughts about their purchase and all three cognitions enter people’s mind. //

Sweeney, j., Hausknecht, D., & Soutar, G. (2000, May). ognitive Dissonance after Purchase: A Multidimensional Scale. Psychology & Marketing,17//, 369-385. <span style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: 100% 50%; background-repeat: no-repeat no-repeat; cursor: pointer; font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; margin: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 10px; padding-top: 0px;">[]

<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;">By: Emily Trevisan
 * <span style="color: #008000; font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 140%;">Cognitive Dissonance, Media Illiteracy, and Public Opinion on News Media **

<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;"> Declining interest in TV and newspaper media consumption prompted this study which closely examined claimed and actual media consumption and public opinion. The study found that the public was engaging in some form of cognitive dissonance regarding media content and consumption: “when the facts regarding attitudes about or use of media content disagree with the public's image of itself, the public will adjust attitudes and tweak memories and tellings of facts so that they are in agreement. This is not conscious and is in addition to news consumers' knowingly lying about media consumption to supply a (more) "socially acceptable" answer, even if an accurate answer is not necessarily embarrassing.”

<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;"> During the past several decades, U.S. news media have commissioned many studies comparing and contrasting the American public's opinion toward and habits with newspapers versus television to analyze media consumption trends. The U.S. newspaper industry and those proponents for newspapers have been very concerned about the long-term future of the industry and were proactive about completing such a study. Print media has been consolidating for nearly a century, even more so with the advent of the World Wide Web and social media use, so understanding public opinion through surveys was necessary. <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;"> This research was conducted through survey method that took into account age, education, habits in addition to impressions of TV newspaper media. The research in this article was compiled through different studies that have taken place since the early 1980’s to the early 2000’s. The findings during this period were compared, revisited and reanalyzed multiple times always with research available.

<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;"> Twenty years of survey research have shown a heavier reliance on TV for news media consumption. TV and newspapers were scored equally on credibility and trustworthiness from the public, but TV scored higher on honesty and ethical grounds. People seemed to favor news anchors and reporters over their newspaper equivalents. This is thought to be because TV is the preferred media and lacks the “separation of time and space” that media consumers experience when reading a newspaper. Cognitive dissonance comes into play because “rather than simply admit that watching television is intellectually, even physically easier, and/or that television news…is cheaper than a newspaper subscription, much of the American public erroneously convinced itself that television news is as complete, more accurate, more credible, less biased, and so on as newspaper content.” Another reason why TV is the preferred news source is newspapers self-admitted errors and letters to the editor. Newspapers admit to significantly higher amounts of mistakes than TV news sources, but contain hundreds of times more information than the average news broadcast (less than one page of a newspaper). Also media literacy, being able to critically analyze and compare these different media, is not widely taught in any formal way and appreciated by most media consumers. If more of the public was media literate, physical newspapers would probably see higher circulation.

<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;"> While physical print media may be on the decline because of the availability and popularity of online media, newspapers and other printed news media have a certain amount of security because they are actually the source of most news broadcasts. Even if readership does continue to steadily decrease, there will be market for this accurately compiled information in one form or another. The future customers or print news media may be news writers and news organizations on the whole. Perhaps print journalism may become just a news research position for broadcast news. While there are still people who prefer print news media to TV news (though the number may be few), the extinction of printed news is difficult to foresee.

<span style="color: #808080; font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;">Claussen, D. (2004) Cognitive Dissonance, Media Illiteracy, and Public Opinion on News Media. The American Behavioral Scientist, 48(2), 212-218. <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;">[|Cognitive Dissonance, Media Illiteracy, and Public Opinion of News Media]

<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;">By: Lola Smith
 * <span style="color: #008000; font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 140%;">Examining the Role of Cognitive Dissonance in Crisis Fundraising **

<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;"> In times of natural disasters, people are often impacted by catastrophic events and want to donate to relief efforts even though they may not be connected to a region. Fundraising organizations often use media outlets to show graphic devastation and the victims to “pull at the heartstrings” of the viewer. According to a survey done by the American Red Cross, individuals who contributed to the December 2004 tsunami relief efforts were more likely to “experience feelings of cognitive dissonance than non-donors and their donations resulted in consonance-restoration.” This supports Leon Festinger’s hypothesis that, “If an individual feels psychologically uncomfortable then he or she would be motivated to reduce the feelings of discomfort to restore the mental balance.” The purpose of this study is to examine the impact feelings of cognitive dissonance had on individuals’ behavior after the 2004 Asian tsunami.

<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;"> To test the cognitive dissonance theory in relation to the Asian tsunami, there were three hypotheses that were created. The first hypothesis stated, “Individuals who experience stronger feelings of dissonance after learning about the December 2004 tsunami are more likely to donate to charitable relief efforts.” The second hypothesis stated, “Individuals who donated to the tsunami's charitable relief efforts are likely to experience a consonance-restoration effect by making a donation. The third hypothesis stated, “Individuals who donated to the tsunami's charitable relief efforts are likely to experience a consonance-restoration effect by making a donation.

<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;"> The hypotheses were tested based on Internet-based survey of donors to two Southeastern chapters of the American Red Cross. 1,916 emails were sent out requesting participation in the survey. Survey response rate was 37%. There were 712 participants consisting of individuals who both gave and did not give to the tsunami's relief efforts. The survey consisted of 27-questions: 23 closed-ended questions and 4 open-ended questions. To evaluate the impact of cognitive dissonance on giving, an index was adapted from Sweeney, Hausknecht and Soutar's (2000) cognitive dissonance scale. Of the 712 participants, 55% donated to the tsunami relief efforts. These donors contributed $44,581 to the tsunami relief efforts. Women made up the majority of the participants (58%). Caucasians represented 69% of the participants, and African-Americans were the next largest population (12%) To summarize the study: Donors experience strong feelings of dissonance when learning of crisis situations and that making a donation restores the mental balance. By reducing news consumption, individuals were able to avoid seeing the repeated footage of the devastating tsunami. This study also supported Festinger's original hypothesis that individuals would avoid situations that would increase their feelings of dissonance.

<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;"> There have been many natural disasters since the Asian Tsunami of 2004. Catastrophes such as Hurricane Katrina, the Haiti Earthquake, Gulf Coast oil spill, etc., have shown people are always willing to donate to help out a cause. Cognitive dissonance plays a definite role in that by donating, a person feels they helped in some way and their mental balance is again leveled (until the next disaster, of course).

<span style="color: #808080; font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;">Waters, Richard D. (2009). Examining the role of cognitive dissonance in crisis funding. ScienceDirect, 35(2), 139-143. http://www.sciencedirect.com.libproxy.sdsu.edu/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6W5W-4V87DJB-1&_user=521817&_coverDate=06%2F30%2F2009&_rdoc=1&_fmt=high&_orig=search&_origin=search&_sort=d&_docanchor=&view=c&_acct=C000059576&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=521817&md5=523bb9564a729a99c54113b17a1e1304&searchtype=a


 * <span style="color: #008000; font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 140%;">Communication Apprehension, Extraversion-Introversion, and Anticipated Happiness. **

<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;">By: Amanda Setter <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;">The purpose of this study of the Communication Apprehension construct explains the connection between individuals and their communication relationship. The definition of the communication apprehension is defined as an "individual level of fear or anxiety associated with either real or anticipated communication with another person or persons." This study was used in examining individuals, both introverts and extraverts and anticipated happiness through the communication channel. The validity was challenged for failure to demonstrate cross-situational consistency, which means how people analyze how they experience events and comparing them to those of others. This study set out to find relationships of the communication apprehension yield and how it relates to personality traits and works at improving the lives of people who live with communication anxiety. This study correlates to Cognitive dissonance Theory by showing the theory of cognitive dissonance proposes that people have a motivational drive to reduce dissonance. They do this by changing their attitudes, beliefs, and actions. Dissonance is also reduced by justifying, blaming, and denying. This correlates to this study done to extract attitudes towards communication behaviors and personalities and also attitudes towards happiness.

<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;">The study as conducted at large midwestern college universities in which 105 students participated for receiving extra credit in their class in return for their time and effort. Seventy-one percent were male and the mean age was 21 years old. The study tested the predictive validity of the communication apprehension construct and how it would relate to introversion-extroversion behavior. The participants completed questionnaires, and predicted levels of happiness in over 58 hypothetical situations. The situations were manipulated socially and in levels of pleasantness to determine the correlation of communication and direct anticipated happiness. The Communication Apprehension (CA) construct monitored apprehension for communication in four contexts: dyads (face-to-face conversations), groups, meetings and public speaking events.

<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;">The results showed the data was consistent with the model stating that situations without oral communication were categorized as the highest pleasantness or anticipated happiness, which had the highest number of selected answers. The results proved that the Communication Apprehension scores were inversely relates with anticipated happiness in situations involving oral communication. Similarities with the person they communicated with showed no sign of variance in opinion or change in feeling for oral communication and their comfort level. This study results are plainly summarized as, people who know others and feel comfortable in a situation feel more confident in face-to-face oral communication, whether introversion or extroversion behavior is demonstrated. People still show high levels of discomfort or anxiety with public speaking and general communication skills with others regardless of their peers, professional levels or familiarity with the person. Understanding behavior in communicative contexts requires that characteristics of both the person and situation need to be considered. It showed correlation to script conversation or a communication routine directly relating to the level of comfort or anxiety in communicating with others.

<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;">This study is important because it shows people our own age can still struggle with communication issues and comfort levels in public speaking with strangers or people they know. This study relates to the cognitive dissonance theory because it shows how and why people would change their actions or behavior in their communication to make themselves feel less dissonance. By examining communication patterns of college students, you can see how they change their environment, or avoid a communicative environment to suit their needs or to achieve a certain level of comfort or perceived happiness in their conversations. This way they remain having control over the situation and their feelings to create less dissonance for themselves.

1. Communication Apprehension, Extraversion-Introversion and Anticipated Happiness. http://web.ebscohost.com.libproxy.sdsu.edu/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=5&hid=7&sid=abbb66fe-e906-4ffb-bd50-7d7fcfe7b5cf%40sessionmgr4 2. Wikepedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_dissonance

media type="youtube" key="XOVS_SYyXe8?fs=1" height="385" width="480"

<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;">A classic example of cognitive dissonance in film.Will Hunting puts up mental and emotional barriers and verbally deflects information contrary to what he has known to be true his whole life: 1. The world is a cruel place and he deserved the abuse he sustained as a child 2. No one will ever really love him <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;"> This scene is a good example of the discomfort we feel against contrary ideas to our beliefs.

**<span style="color: #0000ff; font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 22pt;">Analysis of Studies ** <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;">What do all of these studies mean for us? We can see by examining all of these studies how very prevalent cognitive dissonance is and how different media can affect the common mental process in good and bad ways. From watching news on the TV, to making a purchase or voting cognitive dissonance is ever present and can be seen in everyday life. People process it as a negative feed back cycle. When something feels uncomfortable we make adjustments until we reach our comfort zone again, and we do this through reasoning and rationalization. In all of these studies there are many common themes and causes behind the process can be seen: Personal Justification and self-preservation, intentionally blocking new/conflicting information, and larger organizations structuring advertising around creating/treating cognitive dissonance.

<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;"> Personal justification and self-preservation are large factors in how we process our cognitive dissonance and it is effect can be positive or negative. In the high school student study, the students who still cheated and maintained they would continue to cheat after watching videos about academic honesty justified the cheating to themselves by convincing themselves it was out of necessity. In the smokers study, watching media about taking care of us and quitting smoking showed a positive correlation for those who quit smoking. The effect of cognitive dissonance can be a good or bad thing.

<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;"> Cognitive dissonance works in our everyday lives and is seen by people repeatedly putting up barriers to new/conflicting information. In the counter attitudinal and political information exposure study, people resisted reading or talking about an opposing viewpoint to avoid argument and learning about new information. When they researched politics, they did so carefully. Sometimes they learned about two sides of one issue, but mostly people found ideologies fairly consistent with their own and stuck with it. In the TV and newspaper consumption study, people argued that the TV was more honest, ethical, and reliable than a newspaper to justify watching TV news and not reading a paper. The real reason behind this seemed to be time efficiency, as the length of most news broadcasts fits only on one page of paper but are taken usually directly from newspaper sources.

<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;"> Media can sometimes be manipulated to cause or treat cognitive dissonance in the average person. In the cognitive dissonance after purchase study, advertisements were designed to handle the common processes people experienced after purchase. After purchase people asked themselves if they made the right choice, if they really needed it and did they get a good price on it. Many companies and their advertisements truly influence us. In the crisis fund-raising study, the campaigns to raise funds for relief efforts, like the 2004 tsunami relief, showed a lot of explicit footage to evoke emotional responses out of viewers. For some people, just knowing that disaster can strike like that somewhere in the world created a cognitive dissonance situation in their minds. Donating to the relief effort helped clear the conflict from these people. The intentions of relief effort organizations are admirable, but the method is still somewhat manipulative.

<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif;"> It is not surprising how frequent cognitive dissonance occurs when we consider that companies and organizations are potentially manipulating us, so we respond by putting up barriers and protecting ourselves. Sometimes it is to our benefit, but we might be just hurting ourselves when we resist learning something new or giving it fair consideration.

<span style="color: #0000ff; font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 22pt;">**Today and Tomorrow**

It is 2010 and cognitive dissonance has ever changed. Not so much the actual theory it self, but the mechanisms that create the experience of cognitive dissonance. Today there are more platforms to experience the effects of cognitive dissonance then ever before. The Internet opened the floodgates for flow of information and ideas, giving way for new ways for advertising and media coverage of world events.

Peer to peer, and social networking sites give the user up to date personal posts, blogs, pictures, and video. What this does is give the public more information, making it hard for people to not form their own opinion. These sites such as twitter and Facebook give first and account of real situations, thus limiting what mass media producers such as news stations, magazines, ad agencies, and governments can say and do without having the public not listening because they think otherwise. What I am trying to say here is technology has made it so more information can be shared than at any point in history, resulting in a more informed, opinionated public that is not as easily duped.

We think that it is safe to say that cognitive dissonance will be around for many generations to come. Cognitive dissonance seems to be a common process, even without much effort, but can be manipulated by media: i.e. Tsunami relief effort and purchasing studies. Some of the efforts are good, and some are for a profit. Media organizations can treat cognitive dissonance with an ad, or create cognitive dissonance so you will donate to a good cause. Knowing we are being manipulated and trying to avoid manipulation by these organizations may cause more cognitive dissonance as we put up barriers and try to protect ourselves

It seems we have a lot of external influences to perpetuate this cycle and a lot of internal protective mechanisms to prevent us from learning how to change/process new/conflicting information differently.