Organizational Behavior: Cognitive Dissonance & Justification PDF

ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR Cognitive Dissonance & Justification L. Jeff Seaton, PhD. Murray State University  Wrongdoing Behavior or action that is wrong, improper, evil, blameworthy, misdeed or sin. A violation of standards of behavior. It is human nature to...

ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR Cognitive Dissonance & Justification L. Jeff Seaton, PhD. Murray State University  Wrongdoing Behavior or action that is wrong, improper, evil, blameworthy, misdeed or sin. A violation of standards of behavior. It is human nature to not want to admit that we are wrong or did wrong! SLIDE #1  Perception of Wrongdoing SLIDE #2  Cognitive Dissonance Cognitive Dissonance – the mental discomfort a person experiences as a result of having two or more contradicting attitudes, beliefs, ideas, values or when a person behaves in a fashion that is inconsistent with their beliefs or values. SLIDE #3  Cognitive Dissonance Cognitive dissonance was first investigated by Leon Festinger, arising out of a participant observation study of a cult that believed that the earth was going to be destroyed by a flood, and what happened to its members — particularly the really committed ones who had given up their homes and jobs to work for the cult — when the flood did not happen. SLIDE #4  Cognitive Dissonance While less committed members were more inclined to recognize that they had made fools of themselves and left the group, committed members were more likely to re-interpret the evidence to show that they were right all along (the earth was not destroyed because of the faithfulness of the cult members). SLIDE #5  Cognitive Dissonance Cognitive Dissonance – the mental discomfort a person experiences as a result of having two or more contradicting attitudes, beliefs, ideas, values or when a person behaves in a fashion that is inconsistent with their beliefs or values. When an individual behaves in ways that contradict their personal beliefs, ideals, and values, they will feel a mental discomfort (cognitive dissonance) the individual will then find a way to resolve the contradiction (self justification) in order to reduce their mental discomfort and bring internal cognitive consistency (consonance). SLIDE #6  Cognitive Dissonance Cognitive Consistency (Consonance) Behavior Decision = Belief or Values Cognitive Dissonance Behavior Decision > Belief or Values Cognitive Consistency (Consonance) Cognitive Dissonance Self Justification Cognitive Consistency SLIDE #7  Cognitive Dissonance - Cognitive Consistency When cognitive dissonance occurs the individual can relieve mental stress by taking steps to move back into cognitive consistency. Step 1: Change the behavior or the cognition Step 2: Justify the behavior or the cognition, by changing the conflicting cognition Step 3: Justify the behavior or the cognition by adding new behaviors or cognitions Step 4: Ignore or deny information that conflicts with existing beliefs SLIDE #8  Cognitive Dissonance - Cognitive Consistency I am on a diet but I ate a doughnut. This causes cognitive dissonance because I know that eating a doughnut will cause me to gain weight instead of lose weight. Steps to move back to cognitive consistency: 1. Change the behavior or the cognition ("I'll eat no more doughnuts.") 2. Justify the behavior or cognition, by changing the conflicting cognition ("I'm allowed to cheat on my diet every once in a while.") 3. Justify the behavior or cognition by adding new behaviors or cognitions ("I’ll run on treadmill for 30 minutes to work off the doughnut.") 4. Ignore or deny information that conflicts with existing beliefs ("This doughnut is not a high-sugar food.") SLIDE #9  Attribution of Blame Attribution Theory - Theory that explores the ways in which people explain (or attribute) their own behavior and the behavior of others. Psychological (internal) Causes Example: The guy is acting badly because he is a jerk. Contextual (external) Causes Example: The guy is acting badly because he is in a very bad environment where he has to act that way to survive. Attribution theory examines the way people make these attributions. SLIDE #10  Attribution of Blame Fundamental Attribution Error suggests that individuals often overemphasis how much they are responsible for the good things that happen (internal attribution) and how little they are responsible for the bad things that happen (external attribution). Example: I am responsible for the good things that happen in my life. Someone or something else is responsible for the bad things that happen in my life. SLIDE #11  Self Justification Justification A reason, fact, circumstance, or explanation that justifies or defends an act, belief, behavior, etc. Rationalization (Self Justification) Rationalization is the cognitive distortion of "the facts" to make an event or an impulse less threatening or more desirable. We provide ourselves with excuses (justification). “Many people, with sensitive egos, making excuses comes so easy that they never are truly aware of it. In other words, many of us are quite prepared to believe our lies.” (Unknown Source) SLIDE #12  Self Justification In psychology and logic, rationalization or rationalization (also known as making excuses) is a defense mechanism in which controversial behaviors or feelings are justified and explained in a seemingly rational or logical manner to avoid the true explanation, and are made consciously tolerable—or even admirable SLIDE #13  Justification Terms Confirmatory Bias The tendency to search for, interpret, favor, and recall information in a way that confirms one's preexisting beliefs or hypotheses, therefore, decisions are based on bias perception. Sunk Cost Fallacy (Escalation of Commitment) The more we invest in something, the more we fear losing that investment, and will thus continue doing it even if we don’t really want to, in order to avoid knowing we wasted our time, money, and/or effort. SLIDE #14  SELF-JUSTIFICATION Bad people do bad things. Good people do good things. Dumb people do dumb things. Smart people do smart things. Since I am good and smart I should do good and smart things. If I do bad or dumb things someone or something else must have caused my actions. SLIDE #15  Justification Terms Villainization The act of making the victim(s) of our actions or behaviors a bad person (enemy) and thereby, making it easier to do bad things to them. Bad people do bad things to good people. Good people don’t do bad things to good people. Sometimes good people have to do bad things to bad people. SLIDE #16 Common Self Justifications Attribution of Blame – is the process of claiming the unethical behavior was caused by someone else’s behavior. “It’s Bill’s fault. If he had of done his job then I would not have the opportunity to change the time sheets.” Euphemistic Labeling – is the process of using “cosmetic” words to make the behavior sound acceptable. “Borrowing, taking for a little while, taking but planning to repay sound much better than stealing.” SLIDE #17  Common Self Justifications Displacement of Responsibility – is the process of blaming one’s unethical behavior on others. “I was only doing what my boss expected me to do.” Diffusion of Responsibility – is the process of the group using the unethical behavior with no one person being held responsible. “Everybody does it; it’s the way we do business.” SLIDE #18 Common Self Justifications Advantageous Comparison - is the process of comparing oneself to others who are worse. “I have taken a few office supplies home with me but Jane and Bill take much more than I do.” Disregard or Distortion of Consequences – is the process of minimizing the harm caused by the unethical behavior. “If I change the time sheets no one will be hurt and I will not get caught, even if I do I will just get a slap on the wrist.” SLIDE #19