TOEFL iBT Listening Practice

Lecture Transcript

Professor: Good morning, everyone. So, last week we touched upon the concept of attitudes and how they influence behavior. Today, I want to delve into a fascinating related phenomenon known as cognitive dissonance.

Has anyone ever found themselves in a situation where their actions didn't quite align with their beliefs? Maybe you believe in the importance of environmental conservation, but you find yourself regularly using disposable coffee cups. Or perhaps you consider yourself an honest person, yet you once told a "white lie" to a friend to avoid hurting their feelings. This feeling of unease or mental discomfort you experience in such situations is the core of cognitive dissonance.

The theory of cognitive dissonance was first proposed by psychologist Leon Festinger in the 1950s. At its heart, the theory suggests that we have an inner drive to hold all our attitudes and beliefs in harmony and avoid disharmony, or dissonance. When there's an inconsistency between attitudes or behaviors, something must change to eliminate the dissonance.

So, how do we resolve this dissonance? We essentially have a few options.

First, we can change one or more of the dissonant attitudes or behaviors. For example, the person who believes in environmentalism might start carrying a reusable cup. Simple enough, right?

A second way is to acquire new information that outweighs the dissonant beliefs. That same person might read an article arguing that the impact of disposable cups is minimal compared to other forms of pollution. This new information can reduce the dissonance without necessarily changing the behavior.

And a third, and perhaps the most common method, is to reduce the importance of the cognitions, that is, the beliefs or attitudes. The coffee drinker might tell themselves, "In the grand scheme of things, my one coffee cup isn't going to make a difference. There are bigger environmental problems out there." By downplaying the significance of their action, the dissonance is reduced.

Now, a classic experiment that illustrates this was conducted by Festinger and his colleague, James Carlsmith. In their 1959 study, they had participants perform a series of incredibly dull and repetitive tasks – like turning pegs in a pegboard for an hour. Afterwards, the participants were asked to do the experimenter a favor. They were asked to tell the next "participant" – who was actually a confederate, someone working with the experimenters – that the tedious task was, in fact, really interesting and enjoyable.

Here's the crucial part: one group of participants was paid $1 to lie, while another group was paid $20. Now, you might think that those who were paid more would be more likely to believe the task was fun. But the results were the opposite.

The participants who were paid $1 experienced a high degree of cognitive dissonance. Their cognition "I am an honest person" was in direct conflict with their action of lying for a mere dollar. To resolve this dissonance, they were more likely to change their attitude towards the task and actually convince themselves that it was somewhat enjoyable. The one dollar wasn't enough justification for the lie, so they had to change their belief about the task to make sense of their behavior.

On the other hand, the participants who received $20 had a ready-made justification for their lie. They could tell themselves, "I lied, but I was paid a lot of money to do so." The twenty dollars was sufficient external justification, so they didn't need to change their internal attitude about how boring the task was. They experienced less dissonance.

This experiment beautifully demonstrates that when external justification for our actions is low, we are more likely to change our internal attitudes to reduce cognitive dissonance. It's a powerful mechanism that helps us maintain a consistent sense of self. Any questions so far?