Dissonance Cognitive
Fleeting- Référence externe :
- Référence externe :
- Référence externe : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_dissonance
- Référence externe : https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dissonance_cognitive
- Référence externe : https://www.simplypsychology.org/cognitive-dissonance.html
- Référence externe : https://psycnet.apa.org/PsycBOOKS/toc/11622
- Référence externe : https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0065260108600751
Quand on a des perceptions qui ne sont pas cohérentes entre elles, cela nous met en état de dissonance cognitive. Cet état nous rend mal à l’aise et on va chercher à réduire la dissonance en privilégiant une perception plutôt que les autres.
Dans le cas d’un individu, la dissonance cognitive entre aussi en jeu dans l’image qu’on a de soi. On peut donc se retrouver en dissonance cognitive lorsqu’une expérience montre que notre perception était erronée. La dissonance est s’exprime sous la forme
- je suis une personne ayant la qualité Q
- une personne ayant la qualité Q n’est pas sensée X
- j’ai X
Par exemple :
- je suis une personne sensée
- une personne sensée ne se trompe pas
- je me suis trompé
Dans ce cas, on peut soit accepter de s’être trompé, en remettant en question 1 ou 2, soit refuser simplement 3.
Dans le cas de croyances remises en question par des expériences, on va donc :
- soit accepter que le croyance est fausse
- soit rejeter les expériences remettant en question la croyance
Il est plus simple de rejeter les expériences plutôt que de nous remettre en question.
Le contraire est la congruence cognitive.
congruence cognitive
- voir,
impression de cohérence, sensation que tout va bien dans nos perceptions.
citations
In the field of psychology, cognitive dissonance is the perception of contradictory information. Relevant items of information include a person’s actions, feelings, ideas, beliefs, and values, and things in the environment. Cognitive dissonance is typically experienced as psychological stress when they participate in an action that goes against one or more of them. According to this theory, when two actions or ideas are not psychologically consistent with each other, people do all in their power to change them until they become consistent.[1] The discomfort is triggered by the person’s belief clashing with new information perceived, wherein they try to find a way to resolve the contradiction to reduce their discomfort
A person who experiences internal inconsistency tends to become psychologically uncomfortable and is motivated to reduce the cognitive dissonance
They tend to make changes to justify the stressful behavior, either by adding new parts to the cognition causing the psychological dissonance (rationalization) or by avoiding circumstances and contradictory information likely to increase the magnitude of the cognitive dissonance (confirmation bias).[2]
Festinger argued that some people would inevitably resolve dissonance by blindly believing whatever they wanted to believe
coexistence de deux cognitions dissonantes entraîne un conflit cognitif que l’individu va chercher à minimiser.
réduire la dissonance en ajustant ses cognitions de façon à rendre cohérent les éléments de son univers personnel
personne ajuste ultérieurement ses pensées pour les rendre consonantes vis-à-vis d’une cognition initiale ou vis-à-vis d’une cognition produite par un acte préparatoire
Cette théorie va à l’encontre de la conception de l’homme comme un être rationnel. L’homme n’est pas un être rationnel c’est un être rationalisant. C’est celui « qui agit puis qui pense : ce n’est pas parce qu’il soutient telle position qu’il agit de telle manière, mais parce qu’il a agi (comme il a été amené à le faire) qu’il va adopter telle position (Benoit, 1998)[15]
l’homme n’agirait pas toujours rationnellement sur la base de ses convictions mais inversement il justifierait son comportement par un ajustement de ses cognitions à ce comportement.
pour modifier les idées et amener à adopter les comportements attendus, ce n’est pas nécessairement en faisant appel à la rationalité des individus que l’on est le plus efficace (Joule, Bernard & Halimi-Falkowicz, 2008) (Courbet & al., 2013
As presented by Festinger in 1957, dissonance theory began by postulating that pairs of cognitions (elements of knowledge) can be relevant or irrelevant to one another. If two cognitions are relevant to one another, they are either consonant or dissonant. Two cognitions are consonant if one follows from the other, and they are dissonant if the obverse (opposite) of one cognition follows from the other. The existence of dissonance, being psychologically uncomfort- able, motivates the person to reduce the dissonance and leads to avoidance of information likely to increase the dissonance. The greater the magnitude of the dissonance, the greater is the pressure to reduce dissonance.
[3]
La dissonance cognitive (que nous nommerons D.C.) proposée en 1957 par Festinger est définie comme « un sentiment d’inconfort psychologique, causé par deux éléments cognitifs discordants, et plongeant l’individu dans un état qui le motive à réduire ce sentiment inconfortable » (Festinger, 1957).
[4]
Selon Festinger (1957), les individus ajusteraient a posteriori leurs opinions, croyances et idéologies au comportement qu’ils viennent de réaliser. Ainsi, si habituellement, nous nous attendons à ce que l’Homme soit un être rationnel qui agit sur la base de ses convictions, ici le lien est inversé : l’Homme justifie après coup son comportement en ajustant ses convictions à ce comportement, en « animal rationalisant » selon Elliot Aronson (1972). La théorie de
[5]
Cognitive dissonance refers to a situation involving conflicting attitudes, beliefs or behaviors.
— https://www.simplypsychology.org/cognitive-dissonance.html
This produces a feeling of mental discomfort leading to an alteration in one of the attitudes, beliefs or behaviors to reduce the discomfort and restore balance
— https://www.simplypsychology.org/cognitive-dissonance.html
cognitive dissonance theory suggests that we have an inner drive to hold all our attitudes and behavior in harmony and avoid disharmony (or dissonance). This is known as the principle of cognitive consistency.
— https://www.simplypsychology.org/cognitive-dissonance.html
Cognitive dissonance, according to Festinger (1957), is a psychological tension having motivational characteristics
units of the theory are cognitive elements and the relationships between them. Cognitive elements or cognitions are “knowledges” or items of information, and they may pertain to oneself or to one’s environment. Knowledge of one’s feelings, behavior, and opinions as well as knowledge about the location of goal objects, how to get to them, what other people believe, and so forth, are examples of cognitive elements.
dissonant relationship exists between two cognitive elements when a person possesses one which follows from the obverse of another that he possesses.
if A implies B, then holding A and the obverse of B is dissonant
person experiences dissonance, that is, a motivational tension, when he has cognitions among which there are one or more dissonant relationships
The core notion of the theory is extremely simple: Dissonance is a negative drive state that occurs whenever an individual simultaneously holds two cognitions that are psychologically inconsistent.
— https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0065260108600751
theory proposes that when people experience psychological discomfort (dissonance), they strive to reduce it through either changing behaviors and cognitions or adding new cognitive elements.
[6]
If there are inconsistencies, they try to rationalize them to reduce psychological discomfort
[6]
He is proposing that dissonance might arise from logical inconsistencies, cultural mores, inconsistency between a cognition and a more encompassing cognition and past experiences.
[6]
individuals are motivated to reduce the dissonance and avoid situations that increase it.
[6]
Festinger might be considered as the first person who formulated these notions in a precise and applicable form, by providing implications in a variety of contexts. The theory has wide implications and applications to a variety of contexts.
[6]
Three cognitive biases are components of dissonance theory. The bias that one does not have any biases, the bias that one is “better, kinder, smarter, more moral and nicer than average” and confirmation bias.[6]
That a consistent psychology is required for functioning in the real world also was indicated in the results of The Psychology of Prejudice (2006), wherein people facilitate their functioning in the real world by employing human categories (i.e. sex and gender, age and race, etc.) with which they manage their social interactions with other people
all behaviour functions to reduce cognitive inconsistency at some level of information processing
consumers select attitude-consistent information and avoid attitude-challenging information
people mostly consume media that aligns with their political views
Dissonance plays an important role in persuasion. To persuade people, you must cause them to experience dissonance, and then offer your proposal as a way to resolve the discomfort.
the theory maintains that without dissonance, there can be no persuasion
Without a feeling of discomfort, people are not motivated to change
maintaining cognitive consistency, rather than protecting a private self-concept, is how a person protects their public self-image
Festinger’s original theory did not seek to explain how dissonance works. Why is inconsistency so aversive?
he person can choose to exercise a behavior that is inconsistent with their current attitude (a belief, an ideal, a value system), but later try to alter that belief to be consonant with a current behavior; the cognitive dissonance occurs when the person’s cognition does not match the action taken
predictive dissonance account proposes that the motivation for cognitive dissonance reduction is related to an organism’s active drive for reducing prediction error. Moreover, it proposes that human (and perhaps other animal) brains have evolved to selectively ignore contradictory information (as proposed by dissonance theory) to prevent the overfitting of their predictive cognitive models to local and thus non-generalizing conditions. The predictive dissonance account is highly compatible with the action-motivation model since, in practice, prediction error can arise from unsuccessful behavior.
participant read aloud the printed name of a color. To test for the occurrence of cognitive dissonance, the name of the color was printed in a color different than the word read aloud by the participant. As a result, the participants experienced increased neural activity in the anterior cingulate cortex when the experimental exercises provoked psychological dissonance.
Notes pointant ici
- advances in the history of cognitive dissonance
- apprentissage et Dunning-Kruger
- assistante maternelle et changement de situation
- asymétrie de la preuve
- attitude
- auto persuasion
- avoir l’intuition de faire les choses bien vs être convaincu de faire les choses bien
- behavior change and essentialism
- ben, c’est un peu normal
- best practices of a debate
- bien vivre un écosystème qui me crée des dissonances cognitives
- bullshit meetings
- Ce qui est dit d’autre (blog)
- cohérence, congruence
- comment assurer qu’on se comprends ?
- comment concilier appartenance à un groupe et valeurs individuelles ?
- comment discuter malgré les biais cognitifs
- confuse doing one’s best and reach one’s goals/making an error
- continuité de la bijection monotone entre épistémicité de l’objectif du langage des atomes sémantiques
- critique
- critiquer sans solution, ça peut quand même aider
- debate and exploration vs exploitation
- debate should be iterative
- difficulté de passer quand on devient hooligan
- difficulté de reconnaître son erreur
- difficulté de rester dans le jeu de la communication
- différence entre intention et comportement
- dissonance cognitive happens when someone breaks my reality
- dissonance cognitive, c’est souffrir ou s’ouvrir
- does our jewellery make us weak?
- don’t take other people expectations personnaly
- dé-crédibiliser le messager
- débat sémantique vs jeu de la communication
- emacs vs vim
- Ep2 : l’erreur
- expérience de Milgram
- fiche de paye dures à lire
- git history should tell a story. Really?
- how do we increase our knowledge in ordinary life?
- how to identify the difference between problem thinking and procrastination thinking?
- identifying cognitive biases helps feeling better
- il est difficile d’être engagé de façon approprié quand notre entourage ne l’accepte pas
- implicature vs not making assumptions
- importance de la première opinion
- impulsivité et procrastination
- in-group inertia and seeking an equilibrium
- indicator and intellectual honesty
- individuals and interactions over processes and tools fallacy
- indépendance émotionnelle
- inefficient meetings
- interview with stoic army by the creative stoic podcast
- inégalité dans les couples hétérosexuels, charge mentale et gtd (blog)
- is not doing vs not having to do
- je pense qu’on a tendance à refuser de l’aide par rationalisation
- jeu de deviner l’objectif
- jeu de la communication et l’aisance cognitive
- lien entre le choix du langage et les Système 1 / Système 2
- make people write down their assessment before knowing the one of their colleagues
- mes valeurs
- meta cognitive dissonance reduction
- mille-feuilles argumentatif
- misconceptions about scrum
- métaphore salade vs pâtes
- normal
- nudge
- on fabrique les tabous qu’on critique
- on n’aime pas les critiques
- organisation method paradox
- oui mais
- overfitting & reference class forecasting
- Overwhelm vs Overload - What’s The Difference And What To Do! (Part 1)
- people need explanations
- people needing to do pull requests may hide an organisational issue
- persister dans l’erreur
- pkms vs ckms: a cognitive dissonance
- pourquoi j’arrête de manger du foie gras
- pourquoi je porte un masque ?
- pourquoi les gens continuent à l’appeller scrum ? (blog)
- productivity method and straw man fallacy
- productivity system and stoicism
- puériculture péremptoire des pleurs de bébés
- reduce the cognitive dissonance
- risque de laisser traîner un débat sémantique
- réduire la dissonance cognitive
- second brain and modesty
- several interface for several usages
- should I be a team player or a goal player?
- should I say JWT or JWT token, or JWS token or…? (blog)
- sophisme du bazar
- stockage idéal de mes photos
- stress cognitif
- support social
- supporter les gens butés
- teaching goal hypocrisis
- technical lead
- théorie argumentative du raisonnement, rasoir de Hanlon et se sentir bien
- to be meta right
- tomber du train en marche dans un groupe
- tragédie de la définition d’une méthode
- trivialisation
- usage ordinaire des mots permet les pirouettes rhétoriques
- when someone asks for progress
- why do people keep using bad tools?
- why is it hard to let go?
- why is it so hard to do the right thing?
- zététique