p.3 The basic hypotheses I wish to state are as follows:
1. The existence of dissonance, being psychologically uncomfortable, will
motivate the person to try to reduce the dissonance and achieve consonance.
2. When dissonance is present, in addition to trying to reduce it, the person
will actively avoid situations and information which would likely increase the dissonance.
p.3 In short, I am proposing that dissonance, that is, the existence of
nonfitting relations among cognitions, is a motivating factor in its own right... Cognitive dissonance can be seen
as an antecedent condition which leads to activity oriented toward dissonance reduction just as hunger leads to activity oriented
toward hunger reduction. It is a very different motivation from what psychologists are used to dealing with but,
as we shall see, nonetheless powerful. [JLJ - where have we seen the word oriented before?]
p.3-4 And now a word about the remainder of the book. It explores, in a wide variety of contexts, the consequences
of the existence of cognitive dissonance and the attempts on the part of humans to reduce it... Since reduction of
dissonance is a basic process in humans, it is not surprising that its manifestations may be observed in such a wide
variety of contexts.
p.5 under what conditions is dissonance not simply a momentary affair? If the hypotheses stated above are
correct, then as soon as dissonance occurs there will be pressures to reduce it. To answer this question
it is necessary first to have a brief look at the possible ways in which dissonance may be reduced.
p.7 Myrdal states:
A need will be felt by the person or group, whose inconsistencies in valuations are publicly exposed, to
find a means of reconciling the inconsistencies
p.11 the reality which impinges on a person will exert pressures in the direction of bringing the appropriate
cognitive elements into correspondence with that reality... if the cognitive elements do not correspond with a certain reality
which impinges, certain pressures must exist
p.15 The conceptual definitions of dissonance and consonance present some serious measurement difficulties.
If the theory of dissonance is to have relevance for empirical data, one must be able to identify dissonances and
consonances unequivocally... In many cases, however, the a priori determination of dissonance is clear and easy.
p.16 If two elements are dissonant with one another, the magnitude of the dissonance will be a function
of the importance of the elements.
p.17 the total amount of dissonance between this element and the remainder of the person's cognition will
depend on the proportion of relevant elements that are dissonant with the one in question. Thus, if the overwhelming majority
of relevant elements are consonant with, say, a behavioral element, then the dissonance with this behavioral element is slight.
p.18 The presence of dissonance gives rise to pressures to reduce or eliminate the dissonance. The
strength of the pressures to reduce the dissonance is a function of the magnitude of the dissonance. In other words,
dissonance acts in the same way as a state of drive or need or tension. The presence of dissonance leads to action
to reduce it... the greater the dissonance, the greater will be the intensity of the action to reduce the dissonance
and the greater the avoidance of situations that would increase the dissonance.
p.19-20 When the dissonance under consideration is between an element corresponding to some knowledge concerning
environment (environmental element) and a behavioral element, the dissonance can, of course, be eliminated by changing the
behavioral cognitive element in such a way that it is consonant with the environmental element... it is sometimes possible
to change an environmental cognitive element by changing the situation to which that element corresponds.
p.21 even if it is impossible to eliminate a dissonance, it is possible to reduce the total magnitude of
a dissonance
p.24 If dissonance is to be reduced or eliminated by changing one or more cognitive elements,
it is necessary to consider how resistant these cognitive elements are to change.
p.24 The first and foremost source of resistance to change for any cognitive element is the responsiveness
of such elements to reality.
p.28 The maximum dissonance that can possibly exist between any two elements is equal to the total resistance
to change of the less resistant element. The magnitude of dissonance cannot exceed this amount because, at this point of maximum
possible dissonance, the less resistant element would change, thus eliminating the dissonance.
p.55 If there is pressure to reduce dissonance, then to the extent that the person's efforts in this direction
are successful, the latter magnitude should be smaller than the former.
p.55 It is clearly impossible to measure the dissonance or consonance between each of the cognitive
elements corresponding to the action taken and every other relevant cognitive element. Consequently, we must
look for some overall measure that will reflect the total magnitude of dissonance which exists.
