Cognitive Dissonance and Learning

Cognitive dissonance represents an inconsistency between the actions and beliefs of an individual. (Zimbardo, 2007) Self consciousness is a perceptual representation of the properties of oneself. The concept of cognitive consistency is only valid in relation to propositions regarding the state of affairs. (Gawronski, 2012) Such propositions are often invalidated in comparison with experience. Since any perception is a necessarily imperfect representation of reality, a degree of discrepancy is always present between objectivity and conscious manifestations. This state of tension often initiates changes intended to increase the degree of perceptual coherence. (Zimbardo, 2007) The accuracy of knowledge is improved by alterations that accommodate conflicting information. This process represents the continuous development of artificial concepts that enable meaningful interpretations of existence.

Like all perceptions, self concepts are perpetually incomplete summaries of actual properties. (Gawronski, 2012) The intrinsic limitations of consciousness enable attention to only the salient features of objectivity. Like all types of learning, self discovery is the interpretation of sensory experiences in order to derive meaning. A perceptual representation is constructed by integrating new information within the perspective of one’s personal history. Although the artificial concepts prescribe behavior and expectations, the imperfect nature of understanding prevents absolute consciousness. Subjective constructs must remain modifiable to learn from experience and increase the validity of behavioral responses. (Gawronski, 2012)

People generally attempt to maintain consistent perceptual representations. (Fointat, Somat, & Grosbras, 2011) This sense of coherence is threatened when salient conflicts arise between the essential definitions and sensory manifestations of objectivity. (Fointat et al., 2011) Behavior that is not motivated by conscious inclinations questions the validity of a person’s self concept. (Beauvois, Joule, & Brunetti, 1993) Stability and security are threatened by the uncertainty resulting from experiences that are contrary previously constructed knowledge. This experience of inconsistency arouses an aversive psychological state. (Fointat et al., 2011) However, the modification of perceptions enables the integration of new empirical information into the existing perspective of an individual.

Rationalization is one method of reducing the experience of dissonance by explaining the discrepancy between moral ideals and behavior. (Zimbardo, 2007) Rather than modify previously constructed theories, an individual preserves consistency by creating ad hoc considerations. (Beauvois et al., 1993) This subjective justification of previous perceptual problems creates coherence by modifying the representative concept or producing new behaviors that demonstrate a commitment to an essential principle. (Beauvois et al., 1993) Although rationalizations accommodate novelty, altering the essence of a perception to integrate new information is more appropriate than repeatedly adding supplementary stipulations. Theories that are contradicted by objectivity do not inform valid actions. Abandonment or further analysis is the most appropriate response to the failed verification of a subjective concept.

Inconsistency is often an epistemic indicator of errors in a person’s system of beliefs. (Gawronski, 2012) Dissonance represents an illogical relationship between a theory and an experience. (Gawronski, 2012) In this situation an individual must reassess and revise beliefs in order to maintain the rational function of perceptions. (Gawronski, 2012) Learning is the process of increasing the representation of existence within the subjective consciousness. The continuous modification of perceptions enables the generation of behaviors that are increasingly appropriate to the objective context. (Gawronski, 2012) Valid self concepts are founded on behavioral manifestations. Idealized notions that must continuously contort in order to account for deviations are not pragmatic principles. Meaningful perceptions that inform actions do not include irrelevant or false content. The authenticity of conscious representations is increased through the elimination of superfluous beliefs of insignificant consequence. While an individual may attempt to approximate some valued state, this directed development is only inhibited by false assessments and denial. Appropriate changes and actions are founded on serious appraisals of one’s characteristics and behavior patterns.

Cognitive dissonance results from actions that are opposed to a person’s attitudes and motivations. (Zimbardo, 2007) Perceptual consistency is restored through modifications to behavior or perceptions. (Fointat et al., 2011) While behavioral changes may validate existing concepts, the scope of consciousness is increased by the assimilation of new experiences. A person may choose to change themselves in order to develop desired attributes. However, inaccurate perceptions often produce inappropriate behavioral responses. Understanding is founded on authentic information regarding the state of affairs. Cognitive dissonance is an inescapable symptom of the endless potential for new learning.

References

Beauvois, J., Joule, R., & Brunetti, F. (1993) Cognitive rationalization and act rationalization in an escalation of commitment. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 14(1), 1-17.

Fointat, V., Somat, A., & Grosbras, J. (2011). Saying, but not doing: induced hypocrisy, trivialization, and misattribution. Social Behavior and Personality, 39(4), 465-476. doi: 10.2224/sbp.2011.39.4.465

Gawronski, B. (2012) Back to the future of dissonance theory: Cognitive consistency as a core motive. Social Cognition, 30(6), 652-668. doi: 10.1521/soco.2012.30.6.652.

Zimbardo, P. (2007). The Lucifer Effect. Random House: New Yo