Cognitive dissonance theory, or “the theory that inconsistencies produce psychological discomfort, leading people to rationalize their behavior or change their attitudes,” remains one of the most influential and well-known psychological phenomena. One concept tied to dissonance theory is that of effort justification, “the finding that when people suffer or work hard or make sacrifices, they will try to convince themselves that it is worthwhile.”
Several experiments have shown that people will tend to justify their exertions, presumably in order to relieve discomfort (“cognitive dissonance”) that would be associated with the idea that their efforts all went to an unworthy or insignificant cause. As a personal example, in high school I occasionally ran in benefit 5K runs, but didn’t spend the time raising money through sponsors beforehand. To justify the effort of the run, I adjusted my thinking by telling myself the effort was worth the good physical exercise.
An old study by Aronson and Mills on effort justification is particularly relevant to college students. These researchers wanted to test two competing opinions about hazing rituals for fraternities and sororities- one, held by the students, which said hazing increases loyalty to the groups, and the other, held mainly by administrators, which implies hazing was demeaning and did not serve such a useful purpose. The study showed that hazing rituals indeed increase feelings of loyalty and help forge new bonds between group members. This is because of effort justification: students accepted the temporary humiliation and suffering they endured because it was justified by their new ingroup status.
A more recent investigation defines effort justification as “a form of cognitive dissonance in which the subjective value of an outcome is directly related to the effort that went into obtaining it.” It suggests that, in certain cases (and in fact, one example they offer is efforts to obtain group membership) people may infer that an outcome requiring greater input effort actually has a greater value. The researchers think that further developments should be made to distinguish between the effort required to obtain the outcome and the value of the outcome itself.
Another recent, intriguing publication portrays an experiment that verifies cognitive dissonance theory (in particular, effort justification) and disproves ideas laid out by impression management theory. The subjects were students who had to complete a simple task for either an attractive or unattractive researcher. As predicted, effort justification occurred only with the presence of the unattractive researcher; presumably, no additional justification was needed for the other students because their effort was happily expended for the attractive researcher.
Effort justification is relevant in everyday life, more so than you may think. For instance, one student made a video on YouTube showing how a prelaw student utilizes effort justification when preparing for the LSATs. Check out the video using the link below!
“Effort Justification and LSAT Prep Courses.” http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sJfZMxL8Xas
Cognitive Dissonance and Impression Management Explanations for Effort Justification. Rosenfeld et al. Pers Soc Psychol Bull. 1984; 10: 394-401.
Web Of Science Article: http://apps.isiknowledge.com/full_record.do?product=WOS&search_mode=GeneralSearch&qid=4&SID=3Ck1FkfDiJd23nAOjIo&page=1&doc=5
Baumeister, R. F., & Bushman, B. J. (2008). Social psychology and human nature.
No comments:
Post a Comment