"Cognitive dissonance arises from the conflict within ourselves." Leon Festinger
Since the transition of humans to social life, one of the topics studied in all societies has been understanding the reasons behind human behavior. Those who govern societies and systems are aware that understanding the fundamental dynamics of human behavior is crucial for managing them. Psychologists, sociologists, anthropologists—in short, scientists who study humans and their behaviors—have delved into this topic and conducted numerous studies. One of these researchers, Leon Festinger, proposed in 1957 with his theory of "cognitive dissonance" that the fundamental determinant of behavior is the cognitions individuals hold.
According to Webster's Dictionary, cognition is the act or process of knowing something, encompassing both awareness and judgment (1984, p. 257). In short, cognition includes everything related to the cognitive process, such as knowing, understanding, applying, analyzing, synthesizing, and evaluating. It is considered a variable with a significant impact on human behavior. All types of human behavior are determined by the cognitions individuals possess.
Throughout their life processes, individuals develop numerous cognitions, which are among the regulators of behavior. When these cognitions are in harmony, the individual experiences no issues; however, if the cognitions conflict with one another, a state of tension arises that significantly disturbs the individual. This state is referred to as "cognitive dissonance." Within the same theory, Festinger suggests that all individuals possess intrinsic motivations to avoid this state of tension or dissonance and to maintain all their cognitions in harmony. If a person enters a state of dissonance, the conflict created by the clash of their cognitions drives the individual to change one of the conflicting cognitions to restore a state of harmony.
Festinger conducted his famous study supporting this theory in 1959. He did not disclose the true purpose of the experiment to the participants. During the experiment, participants were tasked with performing highly monotonous and meaningless activities, such as arranging 12 spools on a tray and then emptying the tray, or turning a square-shaped knob 90 degrees at each step.
After the meaningless and monotonous tasks were completed, the researchers individually informed the participants that the true purpose of the experiment was to "determine the relationship between expectation and performance." Additionally, they were told that other participants were waiting outside to take part in the experiment. The participants were asked to help create an expectation by telling the waiting individuals that the experiment was "fun and interesting." Some participants were told they would receive $20 for this task, while others were offered only $1. The study continued with those who agreed to participate further.
Cognitive dissonance in this experiment arises from the awareness that the task was boring and that $1 was insufficient justification for lying. Many participants who were given $1 to tell others that the experiment was interesting and enjoyable genuinely convinced themselves afterward that the experiment was fun to reduce the conflict between their previous beliefs and their actions. They began to believe a big lie for a small incentive. In contrast, no significant dissonance was observed among the group who received $20, as the larger reward provided sufficient justification for their behavior.
In summary, according to Festinger's theory of cognitive dissonance, which he also supported with experiments, when people's cognitions conflict, a state of tension arises within the individual. To resolve this tension and restore balance, the individual begins to believe in one of the conflicting cognitions.
In our social lives, we often witness instances of cognitive dissonance in a wide range of individuals, from athletes to politicians. For example, after voting for Party A, a supporter might rationalize reports of corruption involving their party with statements like, "They may be corrupt, but at least they get things done." This is nothing more than an effort to reconcile conflicting cognitions. Similarly, a person who continues smoking despite knowing it causes cancer might defend their behavior by saying, "It’s harmful, but it helps me relax."
Politicians experiencing cognitive dissonance and attempting to restore their internal balance by choosing one of their conflicting cognitions provide some of the most striking examples of this theory. A politician who once vehemently supported or rejected a particular view or option may later begin advocating for the exact opposite. Their defense of this new stance, while completely disregarding their previous position, is nothing more than an effort to align their cognitions and resolve the dissonance.
The healthiest way to resolve cognitive dissonance is not by adopting a cognition that one does not truly believe in for the sake of personal gain, but by aligning with the stronger cognition and correcting the mistake as soon as possible. A temporarily established cognitive harmony may resurface later, and at that point, there will be no way to compensate for the dissonance that has built up.