As 2020 draws to a close (and I mean this when I say that it can’t happen soon enough), many of us will reflect back on what may very well be the strangest year in our memories. Aside from the grief, loss, and frustration this year has brought, it has also left us wondering, more than once, “What just happened?”
Early on in the pandemic, myself, close friends, clients, and many others have struggled to pin down exactly what this season has asked of us. Mixed signals and unclear communication from local and national leaders certainly are partially to blame, but this experience of a global pandemic is also new territory for us all, so a bit of a learning curve when adapting to new norms is to be expected.
On more than one occasion, I have been asked by friends and family the following question:
“Why do so many people seem to struggle to accept information provided to us by scientists, community leaders, and other professionals who have our best interest in mind as we attempt to mitigate the loss of this pandemic?”
The theory of cognitive dissonance refers to situations where attitudes, beliefs, or behaviors are conflicting with one another. Because this conflict leads to mental discomfort and the need for additional energy in order to rationalize the conflicting ideas, one will alter their attitudes, beliefs, or behaviors in order to decrease discomfort and restore mental balance.
The concept of cognitive dissonance was developed by Psychologist Leon Festinger in the late 1950’s. Festinger modeled the theory in small experiments, and also was led to ponder the phenomenon based on events in his own life.
Perhaps the most common example used to demonstrate this theory today is smoking. While most smokers today know that there is evidence to support that smoking tobacco leads to cancer, they continue to smoke. This is an example of cognitive dissonance.
In a year like 2020, where so much of what is being asked of us seems contradictory to what we have grown to know as truth, it is no wonder that many of us are experiencing cognitive dissonance. In the age of sharing every second of our lives to social media, “FOMO” (that is, fear of missing out), and the belief that individualism trumps all, our brains have difficulty holding space for the new realities in front of us, while also maintaining the deeply held beliefs that we have always shaped our lives around.
The excerpt below from McLeod states that our inner drives will compel us to seek out cognitive consistency. In order to do that, something must be eliminated:
“Festinger's (1957) cognitive dissonance theory suggests that we have an inner drive to hold all our attitudes and behavior in harmony and avoid disharmony (or dissonance). This is known as the principle of cognitive consistency.
When there is an inconsistency between attitudes or behaviors (dissonance), something must change to eliminate the dissonance.” (McLeod, 2018)
Cognitive dissonance can occur for any given reason, but what Festinger went on to find was that, specifically, when humans are faced with forced compliant behavior, decision making, and effort, the likelihood that they will experience cognitive dissonance increases.
Let’s jump back to the present, here in 2020. It’s no wonder that those of us that enjoy traveling, being at large events, and going about our days doing as we please have struggled with mask mandates and suggestions to stay home. In our personal lives up until this point, many of us may have joked about experiencing “FOMO” when we stayed home instead of going to that dinner with friends or joining the Friday evening happy hour. Our personal beliefs have been that being around others, engaging in social commitments, and sharing it all to our Instagram or Snapchat was important. (This is not meant to downplay the importance of community, as it has been scientifically proven that meaningful relationships contribute to better outcomes for human beings).
And because we can’t go back and change our previous behaviors (and I don’t know about you, but I also just don’t want to), our brains are now being met with a new expectation (that is, to stay home and avoid these things) and is struggling to hold space for these conflicting ideas.
To make things more complicated, our brains are not only experiencing cognitive dissonance about our ideas of acceptable social behavior, but our ideas of self and community altogether as well.
In the United States, it cannot be emphasized enough that our society encourages individualism. This isn’t a criticism of individualism, it has its place. But when a society that has been encouraged to think, act, vote, and create in each persons’ own best interest is faced with the plea to shift their mindsets to focus on the greater good for their community, again, disharmony is introduced.
2020 has also been full of decision making, which naturally brings up disharmony and dissonance. Whenever we are faced with more than one choice, the highlights of each choice will be what stands out to us, making it that much more difficult to decide between options presented to us.
Even small decisions in 2020 have brought on more mental conflict than usual, as our realities and daily lives have shifted so greatly from the norm before this year. A once small decision about whether to cook at home or eat out can bring up more cognitive dissonance than ever before, and larger decisions about jobs, family, school, big events, and other life changes are plagued with even more mental strain.
So what are we to do? We know that our brains do not want to exist in continued disharmony, and that realistically, we don’t have the energy to consistently work to hold room for competing ideas and beliefs.
How does cognitive dissonance get “solved?”
Festinger found that cognitive dissonance could be resolved using three methods. The first seems rather simple, if someone can change their behavior to not be in disharmony with one of the other beliefs, the dissonance will fade. However, as well all know, changing behaviors that we have become accustomed to is much easier said than done.
Take wearing a mask for example. In March and April, I found myself having to double, even triple check, my handbag for a mask before leaving the house. Because I was not accustomed to this behavior and it is contradictory to how I had always acted, it took a while to adapt.
The second way cognitive dissonance can be resolved is to collect new information that somehow outweighs the dissonant beliefs. Because of this, it’s no wonder that conspiracy theories have taken center stage over the last year, or that changing recommendations from national and regional experts have received such significant criticism. If we are able to find information that disproves the conflicting beliefs we are being introduced to, we can reduce the cognitive dissonance and feel at peace.
For example, when it was shared that wearing a mask prohibits our own droplets from spreading to others, but does not necessarily protect us from the droplets of others, this information became a way for many to rationalize discrediting the dissonant belief that we have to wear a mask whenever we leave our homes. Sure, there was additional information left out about how if everyone wears a mask it will therefore protect everyone, but the brain’s goal was to reduce dissonance, which it did. Goal accomplished, state of normalcy achieved.
And finally, where I find most of the cognitive dissonance being resolved in this time in the lives of those I know and work with lies in the third solution: reduce the importance of the beliefs.
If we can convince ourselves that the validity of the information being shared with us is reduced, or that the consequences of our everyday choices don’t really have *that* much impact on those around us, that pesky dissonance starts to fade. And when it does, our brains experience relief that encourages us to keep doing it.
As humans, we are modeled for homeostasis, and not just physically, but psychologically as well.
So when someone loses a loved one to a virus, and still continues to question the validity of the said virus, it is not that they are heartless or have not acknowledged their realities. In fact, it’s more likely that they have acknowledged both of these beliefs, and they were in disharmony with one another, so their brain worked to protect them by returning to a state of normalcy in the best and quickest way possible by invalidating their belief in the virus altogether.
When a friend denies the existence of COVID-19 or the effectiveness of wearing a mask, it could be that they only get their information from unqualified sources. However, it is also just as possible that they have been given accurate information, and then experienced cognitive dissonance as they’ve worked to reconcile their past beliefs with the new, contradictory information being presented to them, and have found a way to resolve that dissonance that required them to alter their actions and beliefs about the virus.
When a coworker expresses increased anxiety day in and day out related to the virus, and yet also continues to travel or gather in large groups, it does not mean that she does not care about her anxiety. It’s possible that by rationalizing a decrease in validity about the information regarding where the virus is most often contracted, she has found her own way to decrease her anxieties as best as she can.
When a frontline medical worker acts in a way that seems contradictory to the information that their field is producing, it is possible that person is protecting their own state of mind in the only way they feel able to, especially after experiencing vicarious trauma for months on end.
People, both within a pandemic and outside of one, do the best that they can with what they are given in order to succeed. I don’t say this to excuse reckless or unsafe behavior, but I do hope that we can strive to support one another in empathetic ways as we strive to overcome cognitive dissonance in ways that maintain the health and safety of our communities moving forward.
Rationalizing our behaviors can stem from many different places, psychologically speaking, and more often than not, if we seek to find the underlying cause for a behavior beyond the surface, what we will find is a human, just like us, navigating life as best they can, through highs and lows, fear and loss, joy and despair.
As we seek to improve health outcomes in our local communities and beyond, let us remember that perspective taking is a powerful tool for meeting others where they are, and seeking to understand behavior before we jump to change it.
There will come a day in the future when we again are met with cognitive dissonance, but this time it may be due to overcoming anxiety when we are no longer required to wear masks or limit our time with loved ones, when we rejoin crowds at indoor concerts and begin to take family vacations again. We will need to use the same skills we are using now to reach a state of harmony.
What better reason to practice safely seeking harmony in the midst of a pandemic, than to hold the hope that we one day may do it all over again as we return to our deeply held beliefs of old that honor community and celebration?
I can’t think of anything I’d rather shift my behavior for.
Sources:
(McLeod, S. A. (2018, Febuary 05). Cognitive dissonance. Simply Psychology. https://www.simplypsychology.org/cognitive-dissonance.html).
Festinger, L. (1957). A Theory of cognitive dissonance. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
Festinger, L. (Ed.). (1964). Conflict, decision, and dissonance (Vol. 3). Stanford University Press.
Festinger, L., & Carlsmith, J. M. (1959). Cognitive consequences of forced compliance. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 58(2), 203.