The Law of Dissonance–Internal Pressure Is the Secret
There is only one way . . . to get anybody to do anything. And that is by making the other person want to do it.
—DALE CARNEGIE
Most of us feel more harmony in our lives when everything is consistent: our jobs, our homes, our habits, even our soft drinks. Consistency is the glue that holds everything in our lives together, thereby allowing us to cope with the world. Think of all the people you admire. I’ll bet, by and large, most of them are consistent, congruent people. What they believe, what they say, and what they do (even when no one is watching) flow together seamlessly. Typically, a high degree of such consistency in one’s life is indicative of personal and intellectual strength.
People are naturally more inclined—even subconsciously—to gravitate toward and follow individuals who are consistent in their behavior. The converse is also true: Inconsistency in one’s personal and professional life is generally considered undesirable. The person whose beliefs, words, and deeds don’t consistently match up is seen as hypocritical, two-faced, confused, or even mentally ill.
The Theory of Cognitive Dissonance
Leon Festinger formulated the cognitive dissonance theory in 1957 at Stanford University. He asserted, ‘‘When attitudes conflict with actions, attitudes or beliefs, we are uncomfortable and motivated to try to change.’’ Festinger’s theory sets the foundation for the Law of Dissonance, one of the twelve laws of Maximum Influence.
(more…)
Methods of Protecting Mental Consistency
When we feel cognitive dissonance, we have to find a way to deal with the psychological tension. We have an arsenal of tools at our disposal to help us return to cognitive consistency. The following list outlines different ways people seek to reduce dissonance.
Denial—To shut out the dissonance, you deny there is a problem. You do this either by ignoring or demeaning the source of the information. You might also deliberately misperceive the confronting position.
Modification—You change your existing cognitions to achieve consistency. Most of the time this involves admitting you were wrong and making changes to remedy your errors.
Reframing—You change your understanding or interpretation of the meaning. This leads you to either modify your own thinking or devalue the importance of the whole matter, considering it unimportant altogether.
Search—You are determined to find a flaw in the other side’s position, to discredit the source, and to seek social or evidentiary support for your own viewpoint. You might attempt to convince the source (if available) of his error. You might also try to convince others you did the right thing.
Separation—You separate the attitudes that are in conflict. This compartmentalizes your cognitions, making it easier for you to ignore or even forget the discrepancy. In your mind, what happens in one area of your life (or someone else’s) should not affect the other areas of your life.
Rationalization—You find excuses for why the inconsistency is acceptable. You change your expectations or try to alter what really happened. You also find reasons to justify your behavior or your opinions.
Maintaining Psychological Consistency
We find what we seek. If we can’t find it, we make it up. In politics, members of different parties will refuse to peaceably or tolerantly listen to opposing party commercials. Smokers won’t read articles about the dangers of smoking. Drug users don’t spend much time at clinics. We don’t want to find information that might oppose our current points of view.
A study by Knox and Inkster found interesting results at a racetrack.
They interviewed people waiting in line to place a bet, and then questioned them again after they’d placed a bet. They found people were much more confident with their decisions after they had placed their bet than before the bet was made. They exuded greater confidence in their decisions and their chosen horses after their decisions were final and their bets were firmly in place.[1]
(more…)
Using Dissonance to Create Action
Dissonance is a powerful tool in helping others make and keep commitments. In one study, researchers staged thefts to test the reactions of onlookers. On a beach in New York City, the researchers randomly selected an accomplice to place his beach towel and portable radio five feet away. After relaxing there for a while, the accomplice got up and left. After the accomplice had departed, one of the researchers, pretending to be a thief, stole the radio. As you might imagine, hardly anyone reacted to the stage theft. Very few people were willing to put themselves at risk by confronting the thief. In fact, over the course of twenty staged thefts, only four people (20 percent) made any attempt to hinder the thief.
The researchers staged the same theft twenty more times, only this time with one slight difference repeated in each scenario. The minor alteration brought drastically different results. This time, before leaving, the accomplice asked each person sitting next to him, ‘‘Could you please watch my things?’’ Each person consented. This time, with the Law of Dissonance at work, nineteen out of twenty (95 percent) individuals sought to stop the thief by chasing, grabbing back the radio, and in some cases, even physically restraining him.
(more…)
The Law of Dissonance in Marketing
The Bait and Switch
If you can get someone to mentally commit to a product or a decision, he is likely to remain committed even after the terms and conditions change. This is why when stores, for example, advertise very low prices on a television set, they include in small print, ‘‘Quantities Limited.’’ By the time you get to the store, all the bargain televisions are sold, but you are mentally committed to buying a new TV. Luckily for you, there are more expensive models available. So, you go home having spent $300 more on a television set than you originally planned, just because you needed to maintain a consistency between your desire for a new TV and your action of being in the store.
(more…)
Cognitive Dissonance and Public Commitment
Public commitments and dissonance go hand in hand. Even when we feel an action is not right, we still go through with it if we have publicly committed to such a course of action.
For example, when you ask that young lady to marry you and she says yes, there’s a commitment. The announcement of the engagement is a second commitment. All the other actions that follow suit increase your public commitment: telling your friends, getting the rings, asking the parents, setting the date, taking the pictures, sending announcements, paying the deposit for the reception location, etc. Each step closer to ‘‘I do’’ results in a greater level of commitment. Even if one or both of you decide you want to call it off, it actually feels easier to go through with the wedding than to stop the whole procession created by so much public commitment.
(more…)
Getting Your Foot in the Door
One aspect of the law of dissonance is the urge to remain consistent with our commitments. Even if someone begins with a small request then follows it up with a larger request, we still tend to remain consistent in our behavior and answers. This technique of capitalizing on such a principle has been called by several names, including ‘‘foot-in-the-door’’ (FITD), self-perception theory, or the ‘‘sequential request.’’ Basically, it is a means of using a person’s self-perception to motivate her to partake of the desired action. When an individual complies a first time, she perceives herself to be helpful.
If she is asked to comply a second time in an even greater way, she is likely to consent. In an effort to maintain consistency with the first impression and with her own self-perception, she agrees to give even more of themselves.
Three Steps to Using the Law of Dissonance
Step One: Get a Commitment
You can create or reveal commitments in your prospects by ensuring that the commitments are public, affirmative, voluntary, and effortful (PAVE).
Public
Make your prospect’s stand as public as possible. Get a written commitment and make that written commitment public. Involve family and friends in the proposed action. Engage your customer in a public handshake to seal the deal in front of other employees and customers.
Affirmative
You want to get as many ‘‘yes’’ answers as possible because yeses develop consistency within the person that will carry over into your major request. This technique reduces dissonance and makes it easier for prospects to say yes to your final proposal. Even if it is a watered-down, easy request, getting a yes to any request makes it easier to evoke the same response down the road.
Close with a series of questions—ideally six—that all end with a yes. Desire increases with each yes, and decreases with each no. Every time we say yes to a benefit, our desire goes up.
(more…)
