On the whole, cognitive dissonance can be defined as the feeling of discomfort which arises when a persons opinions, attitudes and actions are inconsistent with each other (Festinger, 2003). It is normally accompanied by guilt, shame, anxiety or even fear. Every individual strives to reconcile this inner conflict that can lead to many psychological disorders. Yet, practically everyone has experienced this controversy inside oneself. One of the most widespread situations is infidelity to the spouse. In this case, the term infidelity can imply cheating, bridge of trust or any other form of dishonesty towards husband or wife. Normally, this entails violation of ones beliefs, ethical principles, moral standards and so forth. Very often the remorse of conscience is the most typical attributes of this conduct. It should be borne in mind that cognitive dissonance is possible only under the condition that a partner holds cheating contrary to ones moral tenets because some people do not regard it as something abhorrent or alien to their nature (Peluso 2007). Yet, psychologists argue that even a man or woman of principle seeks a motivational drive that can justify their behavior (Myers, 2008). This motivational drive can be understood as mere excuse.
There is a vast variety of such excuses especially if we are speaking about conjugal infidelity. One of the most common methods is to find a noble pretext, for example, when a husband lies to a wife because he does not want to distress or upset her. Yet, frequently due to these “noble causes” lie can grow into a habit and situation will only aggravate with time passing. Another form of self-vindication is to shift the blame on the spouse. Usually the adulterer attempts to convince oneself that it is the partner who has forced him to lie, cheat, enter into sexual intercourse etc (Peluso, 2007). This approach results either in constant quarrels in the family or divorce. Additionally, some people try to prove that their unfaithfulness or dishonesty was caused by overwhelming circumstances, which were entirely beyond their control. This is one of the most suitable excuses because in this way they can look at themselves as the victims of external forces. The outcome of this self-deception is that infidelity or cheating becomes ethically permissible for them.
Moreover, society can also offer a very plausible excuse for cheating on a spouse. It occurs when disloyalty to a husband or wife is socially acceptable. Of course, every culture condemns such attitude, almost in every country it is considered immoral and outrageous. Cheating is incompatible with every world religion. But this is only official side of the question. There is some kind of tacit agreement, according to which, conjugal disloyalty is viewed as an inseparable part of human existence. This statement applies not only for cheating but for other degrading practices (Cooper, 2007). If the community grants this absolution to a dishonest partner, this behavior will no longer give rise to any cognitive dissonance. In the long term the inner world of such individual will be at peace.
Overall, cognitive dissonance related to adultery emerges only when an person is afraid of probable reproach of others. Naturally, there are some preventive factors such as remorse, anxiety, guilt, but they are closely associated with the norms accepted in a group or culture. Moreover, as it has been previously mentioned people devise very ingenious ways of deluding themselves just to overcome this state of cognitive dissonance. In this case, confession is arguably the best solution to the problem, but only very few dare take this decision.
References
Cooper. J (2007). Cognitive dissonance: fifty years of a classic theory. SAGE.
Festinger. L (2003). A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance. New York Textbook Publishers.
Myers, D. (2008). Social Psychology. New York: McGraw Hill.
Peluso. P (2007). “Infidelity: a practitioner’s guide to working with couples in crisis” New York. CRC Press.
This is the feeling that a person gets when he or she is confronted by two opposing ideas at the same time. It happens when one is persuaded to do something that is contrary to his or her beliefs. It can be explained as embarrassment, guilt, or an uncomfortable feeling. The strength of the feeling is increased with the increase in the importance of the conflicting matter and the inability to make a rational decision on the best way of doing something. As individuals, there is what we believe that we are, if I do something that is contrary to my beliefs then I will be faced with the dissonance feeling. For example, if I believe that I am wise enough to make an informed decision, but misleads somebody who had come for advice and leads to injury on the other person, I feel guilty of the action. This also happens when we are looking into the lives of others and find them doing the opposite of what we believe is the right thing. We are faced with dissonance (Cooper & Fazio, 1984). To relieve ourselves from the guilty feeling, there are things that we do that in turn affect who we are or the action that we undertake in life. This paper will discuss the action that we take as a remedy to the dissonance feeling and how they affect our day-to-day life.
Change Our Behavior
The attitude and belief that I hold today were instilled in me right from the time that I was born. In most cases, it is not as a result of deliberate actions but I found myself the way I am, it is through socialization, inherited aspect/ biological aspects. They may not be in line with other people’s beliefs and thus after I undergo a conflict of beliefs as I interact with others, there is the possibility of deliberate decisions to change my behavior so as to fit in the group. The change can be to a more socially acceptable behavior or it may change to a behavior that is acceptable to the group but socially unacceptable. For example, if a child has been brought up in a family that does not allow sharing of what one has, the child may develop a behavior of being selfish; if he goes to other children that believe in sharing, the child is more likely to change the perception towards giving. In the case of an adult, if one has been working in a firm where the organizational culture generally works against the top management, if he goes to another company that believes and adheres to free interaction between the top management and the staff, he will feel guilty of the attitude that he has come in with and is more likely to change the behavior (Tavris & Eliot, 2007).
Justify Our Behavior by Changing the Conflicting Cognition
To defend my beliefs and attitudes, I may make decisions that are aimed at justifying my actions even after the occurrence of a conflicting issue. This has been recognized by the “fox theory” this is when the fox after realizing that it can’t reach some fruits that were ripe, said that they may be bitter. The same happens with the life of human beings; you may be confronted with conflicting situations and instead of being persuaded to the other you look for factors to reinforce your own behavior. After that, the belief and the attitude that you have developed becomes part of you (Harmon-Jones & Mills, 1999). For example, if someone believes that a catholic priest is not supposed to marry; then he gets stories that the priest actually commits adultery, he is faced with the dissonance of whether to leave that church or not. Instead of being persuaded to leave the church, he may wave everything by a simple justification that the pastor has felt like any other person and thus the act can be legitimized.
It Molds
My personality defines the attitude that I have on various aspects of life. The way I perceive things is molded by the past experiences that I have had about a similar situation. I sometimes get to interact with people who have had a different experience on the same issue and thus they make decisions in line with their past feeling and experiences. When in such a group, I will be more persuaded to change my attitude toward the said issue. For example, someone may hold a negative attitude towards the single parent, because of one who used abusive language to the children who thereafter adapted the same behavior. If he is then in the midst of well-behaved single parents or children of single mothers; he can easily change the attitude that he holds on single parents and think positively of them (Cooper, 2007).
Conclusion
Our beliefs, attitude, and experiences define who we are and the decisions and attitude that we hold. Since in this world no one is an island, we are faced with contradicting issues, and our own actions to this cause cognitive dissonance. It molds us and leads to change of some aspects of our lives.
References
Cooper, J., & Fazio, R. H. (1984). A new look at dissonance theory. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 17, pp. 229–266). New York: Academic Press
Cooper, J. (2007). Cognitive dissonance: 50 years of a classic theory. London: Sage publications.
Harmon-Jones, E., & Mills J (1999). Cognitive Dissonance: Progress on a Pivotal Theory in Social Psychology. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association
Tavris, C. & Eliot A. (2007). Mistakes were made (but not by me): Why we justify foolish beliefs, bad decisions, and hurtful acts. Orlando, FL: Harcourt
The question of the article is whether cognitive dissonance plays a role in the elections and the voting process. Cognitive dissonance supposes that people who have chosen a specific behavior will align their attitudes according to such behavior. In case the behavior is realized to be unwanted or negative later, the individual will be even more inclined to repeat the behavior and support it by changing their attitude to fit that behavior.
This is an important issue because it greatly affects the results of the election and the way people view themselves and the government. If people chose leaders only due to a misplaced feeling of self worth or importance of their own comfort and self respect, than the leaders chosen do not really reflect the qualities of morality and justice. This means that people select leaders out of lowered feelings of own opinions and thus, the whole system becomes pointless.
The framework that is used to study the problem is the statistical method that will compare people who are eligible to vote, versus those who are not yet of age, thus do not vote. The outcome of the future elections and preferences are predicted to be affected by the previous selection of the candidate.
Specific aspects of individuals are examined, more particularly age, previous knowledge of the candidate and general political education, as well as interest in government and economical state of the country. Preferential views of the members of the same party are also taken into account.
This sort of research model is advantageous, as it addresses issues that were given little attention in the past. Also, the age of voting has been changed and this added a large amount of population to the voting process. The authors also address the voting by other racial groups and this issue has become a significant determinant. Placebo technique was used in the study to determine the effecting variables and biases of the study.
Data that used was taken from the statistics of previous voting processes. Voting numbers from 1978 until year 2000 are being analyzed, to determine any patterns or irregularities. The National Election Study or NES is being used to determine people’s political attitudes, behaviors and general views towards politicians, governmental institutions and elections in general. There were also interviews conducted that included personal questions.
As the opinions of individuals greatly vary, NES allows for a more specific determination of opinions towards certain politicians. The dependent variable was the amount of individual feeling people had towards the president. A number of personal characteristics of the leader that people expect to see were also included, to give a better picture of what the public views as important qualities of a politician.
The tables used in the study show the relationship between different social classes and races. Marital status, education, place of residence, age, race and preference to a specific political party were considered to show the statistical difference between people’s beliefs and behaviors. Also, variables were compared according to presidential elections and senatorial ones.
The results have shown that there is a positive correlation between previous voting and future selection of the candidate. Even though there are limitations and variables that cannot be fully controlled, there is dependency which leads to polarization. Further studies and testing are needed to increase the reliability of such studies.
Organizational or personal set ups often require instances of decision making. Whether made at personal or corporate levels, individuals are faced with instances of making decisions under competitive options.
This condition always presents discomfort in emotions. The uncomfortable emotion that is experienced as a result of having conflicting ideas is called cognitive dissonance. This paper seeks to discuss cognitive dissonance. The paper will look into the theory of cognitive dissonance as well as reactions and concepts that are characteristic of the condition.
Cognitive Dissonance
Cognitive dissonance is a philosophical theory that was developed by Leon Festinger at the beginning of the second half of the twentieth century. Cognitive dissonance is based on mental discordance of something happening contrary to the way it is supposed to happen. Leon Festinger established through observation that though inconsistencies were common occurrences in life, they made people to have some sense of discomfort that drove them to correct the inconsistencies.
The strength of the drive for corrective measures was also established to be proportional to the extent of inconsistency that was experienced by an individual. Thus, it can be argued that cognitive dissonance establishes the fact that people are not well receptive to inconsistencies, especially when such are aligned to the negative side (Cooper 5).
Cognitive Dissonance Theory
Leon Festinger who was active in the field of philosophy established and published the cognitive dissonance theory in the year 1957. His theory seemed to be simple and almost non substantial from the outset and was almost disregarded from its presentation. In the theory, Leon just expressed the fact that “people preferred consistency to inconsistency” (Cooper 6).
The term cognition means knowledge that brings the notion of the theory to a mental capacity. This is particularly experienced when an individual is faced with conflicting interests. The state of dissonance can also be caused by an experience that is contrary to a person’s expectations, beliefs or even thoughts (Cooper 6).
Development of the Theory
The concept of cognitive dissonance gained much of its development following the establishment of Leon’s theory of cognitive dissonance. The theory that did not seem to be so distinct at the onset attracted reactions which initiated studies on the concept of cognitive dissonance.
Scholars who were driven by desires to disapprove the theory embarked on a move to gain a deeper understanding of the concepts and that increased the understanding of the concept of the theory thus made a rich contribution to the concept of cognitive dissonance.
There were also those scholars who undertook to study the concept on the basis of gaining knowledge. Consequently, the result was a culmination into a wider spread and acceptance of the Leon’s cognitive dissonance theory. Individuals such as Irvin Janis and Milton were known for the opposing the cognitive dissonance theory. The criticisms presented by those who opposed the theory, however, came with proposals of contrary thoughts and presentations that further contributed to the wealth of the aspects of cognitive dissonance concepts.
The ideology of cognitive dissonance has been an establishment that was fuelled by the theory formulated by Leon Festinger. The reactions that Leon’s theory enlisted established a basis for further developments that were realized in the philosophical school of cognitive dissonance. Cognitive dissonance has since then become a wide topic in psychology (Cooper 28).
Concept of Cognitive Dissonance
Cognitive dissonance has been recognized as a key element in the manner in which people behave. Studies have shown that people put in a lot of effort to help in the reduction or control of cognitive dissonance. The level of inconsistency in an individual’s thoughts is also identified to be related to personality factors. The degree of self dependence of individuals, for instance, relates to the possibility of encountering such inconsistencies as well as the manner in which an individual handles dissonance.
People who are characterized by a high level of self independence are, for instance, less likely to encounter dissonance as compared to individuals who are dependent on other people and factors. This is because self independence or self reliance controls external forces that might influence or dictate an individual into cognitive dissonance.
Interdependency on the contrary exposes people to a lot of factors and forces that in most cases drives people to conflicts. The conflict may be with respect to two aspects: some two or more factors may pose a conflicting situation to an individual or an issue may be in conflict with an individual’s ideologies.
A person can be faced with two external factors that are completely opposite in terms of their ideological applications. Under such a circumstance, an individual will be in conflict over the handling of the conflicting issue; which one to be resolved and which one to be compromised. A conflict similarly arises when a circumstance poses a conflicting ideology to an individual’s personality. In this case, an individual is forced to be in a situation that he or she believes is contrary to his or her established character (Kim 72).
The response to cognitive dissonance is also influenced, to a great extent, by personality with respect to self dependence. Though individuals who are open to their environment are more susceptible to cognitive conflicts, their exposure to the environment gives them an advantage of approach to dealing with such conflicts. This group can therefore easily deal with arising conflicts to eliminate disturbances.
Self concealed individuals are on the contrary less exposed to cognitive dissonance and at the same time weak in handling such issues when they arise. The trend developed by individuals who are not very independent on their environment, in adjusting to their environmental needs as well as solving collective problems around them plays an important role in shaping reactions to cognitive dissonance. Events of dissonance yield attempts by individuals to rise and overcome the posed conflict.
Whether in cases of independent individuals or cases that involve individuals with extensive attachments to their environments, the capacity to resolve cognitive dissonance depends on a number of other factors. Factors such as “needs, desires and goals” and the drive to achieve these factors forms some of the basis of response to cognitive dissonance (Kim 73).
When faced with a cognitive dissonance, individuals are forced into attitudes that are contrary to their normal behavior. The circumstance causing the dissonance establishes an imbalance between an individual’s immediate emotions and the inner behavior. A response that is the solution to the conflict is then the attempt to realign an individual’s feelings to the inner being.
There are a variety of approaches that individuals employ in their attempts to make resolutions. Consolation has been one of the approaches that individuals use as a means to reconcile themselves with dissenting emotions. An individual who, for instance, receives a benefit out of circumstance leading to the dissonance would, for example, have his or her consolation on the benefits.
An individual who does not gain from an event that leads to the particular dissonance can on the other hand resort to change of emotions as a resolution to their discrepancy between their attitude and their behavior.
A case consideration of involvement in criminal activity such as robbery can illustrate the case. An individual who ventures in a robbery exercise and succeeds in stealing a lot of money may not be at ease after the incident but will have the consolation of the money obtained from such activity. A failure to undertake the robbery may leave the same individual with no option other than running away from thoughts of the act as a consolation. This is particularly the case when the individual is somehow remorseful over the activity.
Generally, the move to resolve dissonance involves making sure that the discrepancies between behavior and attitude are reduced or even completely eliminated. There are four basic ways of handling inconsistencies. The first approach is for an individual to change their attitude so as to align it with behavior.
Under this approach, the individual can be said to regret the circumstance that led to the inconsistency and is principled to personality. The inconsistency is thus accepted and attitudes transformed from the dissonance into the person’s normal behavior. The approach is more of preservative to an individual’s behavior (Nevid 288).
Alternatively, an individual can resort to transforming his or her behavior in order to match that of the induced attitude. In this approach, the individual can be seen as being inclined to the cause of the dissonance.
The transformation of an individual’s behavior towards an induced attitude can be due to a number of reasons: the first reason that can explain this approach is emotional weakness that cannot allow the individual to withstand a transformation. Extreme level of such weakness may lead to loss of self control with the individual being controlled by emotions.
A person will then yield to the causes of dissonance with the solution of incorporating such circumstances into his/her life and character. In the case example of a robber above, an individual will under this approach change his or her behavior to accepting the crime. This approach has the effect of transforming a person to new actions towards environmental circumstances.
Another approach involves an individual’s provision of reasons for the difference between behavior and attitude. Once a convincing explanation is arrived at, there will be an induced perception of solution to the conflict. The reason may be consolations to bring the behavior in terms with the attitude while the cause of the conflict is left untouched.
The approach can then be seen as an attempted incorporation of the first two approaches while the event leading to the dissonance remains untouched. It is therefore more of a cover up to the cognitive conflict than a solution.
The last approach is a dismissive one of assuming that the conflict does not exist. The individual in conflict will under this approach maintain the status quo of exposure to the source of conflict while at the same time continues to suffer from the effects of such conflicts.
A case example of cognitive dissonance in a person who smokes will therefore entail the admission to dangers of smoking which can lead to an individual stopping smoking so as to align his/her behavior with the conviction, change the attitude that smoking is not dangerous and maintain the behavior of smoking, dismiss the conflict on the perception that smoking is not the only source of danger thereby holding to both behavior and attitude or just dismiss any thoughts of the dangers of smoking and continue with the practice.
Jeffrey explained that the most important concept of cognitive dissonance was the justification of the effort that was associated with the event in conflict. Jeffrey argued that the level of value attributed to an event was normally associated with the level of effort that was put into the event.
Extensive efforts that are employed by an individual to solve cognitive dissonance with respect to aligning behavior and attitudes may then offer them a higher value in the society more than that of offering explanations to sources of the cognitive conflicts or just totally ignoring the conflict (Nevid 288).
Vicarious Cognitive Dissonance
Cognitive dissonance can also be induced in an individual by actions of other parties. When a person in a society witnesses another member undergoing cognitive dissonance, a reaction may be induced in the observer such that emotions are stirred up in the observer as if he/she (the observer) was the one undergoing the observed action.
The concept of vicarious dissonance rises from the fact that no individual can be completely independent in any given set up. For each and every individual person, there exists an attachment to the society which as a result leads to social influence.
The influence could either be directed from the individual to the society or from the society to the individual. An induced concept in a society will, for example, call for varied response by members of such a society. Researches carried out on social groups extensively revealed that a level of dissonance that was exhibited by an individual in a community had a high chance of causing dissonance in other members of the same group.
Such studies are historically established; the first of such studies was carried out in the first half off the twentieth century and was on a religious group that believed that the world was to end (Forgas, Cooper and Crano 127).
Vicarious cognitive dissonance is also significantly explained by the concept of social identity. Forgas and his co authors established the fact that social identity “depersonalized self conception and transformed one’s own perception, beliefs, attitudes, feelings and behaviors” (Forgas, Cooper and Crano 127).
Social identity makes it possible for an individual to experience cognitive dissonance without necessarily being exposed to the causative agents. Social identity also has the potential to transform an individual through assimilation of the individual. A person possessing particular traits can be naturally assimilated when the individual is exposed to particular practices in the society. Such assimilative moves can drive an individual to transformations that are a result of cognitive dissonance that never affected the individual.
Influence of a society on its individual members to adopt a variation in character is another direct concept of vicarious cognitive dissonance. Apart from having the freedom to transform into practices of a tolerant society, there are instances where an individual is forced to transform his or her attitude to be in line with those that are required by the society. Under all these cases, an individual is forced into a transformation that is not a result of a personal act leading to cognitive dissonance (Forgas, Cooper and Crano 128).
It was established that vicarious cognitive dissonance was induced in ways that were quiet different from what caused direct dissonance. While direct dissonance was attributed to personal encounters, vicarious cognitive dissonance was based on an individual’s emotions with respect to another person. The perception that a victim suffers from cognitive dissonance plays a significant role in shaping people’s behavior or attitudes.
Researches have revealed that vicarious cognitive dissonance was primarily based on empathy rather than fear. People are not influenced by experiences of others on the basis of dangers or negative experiences but on emotional attachment to the experience involved. Even though negative impacts of events affect the degree of vicarious dissonance, it does so through influencing empathy (Forgas and Williams 337).
Conclusion
Studies have been carried out to understand human behavior. One such behavior has been discussed in this article in lengthy. It has been shown that human beings naturally tend to avoid uncomfortable situations such as conflicting situations whereby there is a need for one decision to be made.
Cognitive dissonance is an occurrence of conflict of interest in an individual’s thoughts. The dissonance is induced by an occurrence to or about an individual that is characterized with compromise of character. Responses to dissonance can have the effect of resolving the conflict through a variety of transformational measures. Cognitive dissonance can also be acquired vicariously.
Works Cited
Cooper, Joel. Cognitive dissonance: fifty years of a classic theory. London, UK: SAGE, 2007. Print.
Forgas, Joseph and Williams, Kipling. The psychology of attitudes and attitude change. New York, NY: Routledge, 2010. Print.
Forgas, Joseph., Cooper, Joel and Crano, William. The Social Self: Cognitive, Interpersonal and Intergroup Perspectives. New York, NY: Psychology Press, 2003. Print.
Kim, Min. Non-western perspectives on human communication: implications for theory and practice. London, UK: SAGE, 2002. Print.
The proponents of the cognitive dissonance theory, Leon Festinger and James Carlsmith, argue that people are bound to change their attitudes if they realize that their actions do not reflect their true attitudes. This contradiction between actions and attitudes is referred to as cognitive dissonance (psychological tension), which can be reversed by people changing their behaviors in order to reflect the prevailing circumstances.
On the other hand, the opponent of the cognitive dissonance theory, Daryl Bem, proposes a different theory (the theory of self-perception) in which he posits that if people are not sure about their present attitudes, they tend to assess their behaviors in order to establish their attitudes.
Accordingly, Bem argues that psychological tension is not the basis of the contradictions between actions and attitudes as proposed by the cognitive dissonance theorists.
To support their claim, Festinger and Carlsmith propose an experiment in which they observe opinion/behavioral changes that follow from forced compliance. The experiment involved participants performing seemingly boring tasks after which they are paid to lie to other participants that the tasks were enjoyable.
The participants were paid different amounts, that is, some were given $1 while others received $20. The findings of the study show that participants who were paid $1 experienced cognitive dissonance in that their actions contradicted their true attitudes about the experimental tasks. Conversely, the $20 group showed no significant differences with the control group.
These findings corroborate the cognitive dissonance theory in that when the participants were asked to do what is contrary to their true opinions; they changed the opinions to correspond to their actions. However, the researchers observed that the larger the pressure to elicit the contradicting action, the weaker the tendency for behavioral changes.
Contrary to Festinger-Carlsmith’s findings, Bem tried to replicate the experiment in order to show that the results did not necessarily support the cognitive dissonance theory. In his experiment, 75 college students were selected into the $1, $20, and control groups. Bem’s experiment was aimed at determining the accuracy involved in people judging others.
All participants listened to recordings of one participant (Bob) who had participated in the experimental tasks, which had been described in detail to them earlier. Afterwards, the participants were allowed to listen to the conversation between the same participant (Bob) who had been paid to lie and another participant waiting in line whereby the former lied about how he had enjoyed the tasks.
All the participants were then asked to evaluate the answers given by Bob to the same questions, which had been used in Festinger-Carlsmith’s experiment, and rate them in a scale of -5 (tasks were boring) to +5 (tasks were enjoyable) or 0 (tasks were neutral). The results show that the $1 group differed significantly from the control conditions in that they were on extreme ends of the scale.
Relative to the self-perception theory, participants who accepted $1 to lie may have concluded that the experimental tasks must have been enjoyable because they had told someone the same considering that they had been paid $1 to lie.
As a result, Bem concluded that people’s attitudes follow from their actions as opposed to behavioral changes that result from psychological tension. Furthermore, additional studies tend to point to the fact that the self-perception theory can effectively account for Bem’s experimental findings.
The problem that is discussed in the provided case study is the impact of cognitive dissonance in learning work behavior. Dechawatanapaisal and Siengthai (42) explain that the purpose of the research study done is to propose a framework that highlights some of the underlying elements that affect learning behavior in the workplace. Additionally, the scholars explain that the survey takes into account different perspectives offered by various carefully selected employees on the issue.
Through the study, the reader can denote that the scholars perceive a relationship between change and cognitive dissonance in learning work behavior. The authors argue that the problem stated is mostly affected by the lack of acceptance of the change. Thus, the authors, organizations, and businesses have to take full control of their change process to ensure that their employees learn as is expected.
Hypothesis/ Hypotheses Formulated by the Authors in the Article
Dechawatanapaisal and Siengthai (44, 46) propose three hypotheses. The first suggestion, identified as the primary hypothesis, is that there is an inverted U-shape relationship between cognitive dissonance and learning work behavior (Dechawatanapaisal and Siengthai 44). The hypothesis poses that cognitive dissonance and learning work behavior can be defined as either dependent or independent variables. In particular, the authors identify cognitive dissonance as the dependent variable while learning work behavior is the independent variable.
The second hypothesis states that “effective HR practices related to staffing, training and development, performance appraisal, and rewards are inversely related to cognitive dissonance” (Dechawatanapaisal and Siengthai 46). On the other hand, the third hypothesis states that “the effective HR practices that are related to staffing, training and development, performance appraisal, and rewards are positively associated with learning work behavior” (Dechawatanapaisal and Siengthai 46).
The Need for the Study in the Article
Dechawatanapaisal and Siengthai (42) give strong justification for the need for the study. First, the scholars explain that the need for learning has been profoundly affected by the changes in the business and economic global platform. The issue of globalization comes into the discussion, and the scholars argue that due to globalization and technology (Griffin and Moorhead 32; Sagini 12), employers and employees have to keep learning to remain abreast of the different changes proposed by the said two factors.
Also crucial to point out, the scholars give a justification for the context of the study. The study is done in Thailand, and the researchers explain that the area was chosen due to the influx of foreign investments that were brought on by both globalization and technological improvement (Dechawatanapaisal and Siengthai 46).
The Methodology Employed in the Study
Dechawatanapaisal and Siengthai (46) used a quantitative research methodology. The scholars explain that whereas the study used primary data collected through a customized questionnaire, an extensive review of the literature was also done to guide the research. It can be argued that the said literature review was also used to define the theoretical concepts that applied to the study (Dechawatanapaisal and Siengthai 46).
A total of 205 participants were identified to be respondents for the study. Important to note, whereas the questionnaire was originally designed in English, it had to be translated to Thai to fit the context used. In the same breath, the researchers were careful to pre-test the questionnaire, which is important to avoid any mishap during the actual survey. Additionally, out of the 205 questionnaires that were distributed, only 162 usable questionnaires were analyzed (Dechawatanapaisal and Siengthai 47).
Summary of Review of the Literature About the Problem in the Article
As stated, the researchers relied, to some extent, on relevant literature review. The scholars start by defining the term organizational learning and mentioning its importance (Dechawatanapaisal and Siengthai 43). The researchers reveal that the concept of organizational learning has no definite meaning. However, it can be defined as the adoption of new mechanisms, which affect productivity and profitability, in a work environment. It is, thus, concluded that organizational learning is critical and can be defined as the most valuable practice, in dealing with dynamic and ever-changing working environments (Dechawatanapaisal and Siengthai 43).
Apart from definition and importance, the researchers also give a significant account of literature that has already been published on the relationship between organizational learning and cognitive dissonance. Defined as an uncomfortable feeling when an individual tries to balance what he/she already knows and the new things that have arisen, the scholars show how other researchers were able to draw a line between the two concepts.
The argument provided is that change in the workplace introduces a new component to the employee in question. Therefore, the employee has to balance between what he/she already knows, and the new concept that has been introduced. In the perfect set-up, the employee agrees to the change, and he/she lets go of the old ways of doing things. However, if the employee fails to give up on the previous dynamics, then performance is negatively affected.
The Study’s Assumptions, Limitations and Potential for Future Research
There are several assumptions that the researchers go through in the study. The first assumption is that the employee is adamantly holding to the old way of doing things. If the employee lets go of the dynamics of the past, then there will be no cognitive dissonance. In the same breath, one can identify several limitations of the survey. It can be argued that the lack of evidence for the creation of a framework that can show how organizational practices can be used to shape organizational learning is a flaw (Dechawatanapaisal and Siengthai 43). It is based on the said limitation that Dechawatanapaisal and Siengthai (43) give their opinion on potential future research. The authors explain that there is a need for empirical research on the possibility of development and creation of the said frameworks.
Conclusion of the Research Finding
Dechawatanapaisal and Siengthai (51) think that the findings of the research study done should be used in today’s organizational set-up. Notably, they advise that psychological factors associated with human resource practices should be taken into consideration when thinking of developing campaigns for organizational learning (Dechawatanapaisal and Siengthai 51). The authors also conclude that whereas cognitive dissonance relates to some HR practices, it does not necessarily refer to all of them.
The identified elements of HR that are affected by cognitive dissonance are staffing; training and development; and performance appraisal (Dechawatanapaisal and Siengthai 51). The authors also stress the importance of learning about employees’ attitudes and behaviors in an attempt to also motivate them to learn. Interestingly, the angle of the initial purpose of the research paper, which was to create a framework, is not included in the conclusions.
Student Team’s Critique on the Article
Several factors can be described as successful in the case study. The first factor is the full literature review that is provided. The scholars divide the literature review section into several parts, making it easier for the reader to understand the different concepts that are being discussed. The first part, learning in the workplace, only focuses on the idea of learning as is implied in the workspace. The authors are careful to propose studies done on the same. The second area, cognitive dissonance, and learning work behavior focus on the two said concepts. The smooth flow of the literature review allows an amateur to understand the study.
A second favorable factor about the study is the careful and thorough explanation of the hypotheses. As mentioned, there are three hypotheses that the researchers use. Each of the said premises is explained in detail and justified before the research study is presented. The advantage of the said factor is that it gives the reader the general direction of the report.
Thirdly, the justification of the context of the study is also advantageous. The scholars provide a detailed explanation of why they chose Thailand as their area of focus. The researchers’ argument that there has been an increase in foreign investment in Thailand, which makes the region best for the said study, is valid. The researchers are also careful to show how the influx of foreign investments affects globalization, and how in turn, that affects organizational learning.
Having stated the advantageous and fruitful factors, it is also important to point out some of the flaws of the research report. One of the major flaws is that no framework has been presented despite explaining at the beginning of the report that a framework would be developed. Understandably, the researchers might have realized that the development of the suggested framework is impractical or impossible. If that was the case, then the purpose of the study should have been changed accordingly. Interestingly, the purpose of the survey is also different from the hypotheses. The hypotheses go hand in hand with the presented data.
The fact that the framework is missing makes the reader feel like the research study is incomplete. Holloway and Brown (21) explain that a good research report has to give the reader a feeling of completion. Additionally, a good research report has to adhere to the purpose of the study stated. Sugar and Luterbach (289) explain that many research studies fail to prove their research studies. However, in such instances, the research reports give reasons why the purpose was not achieved.
Another major flaw of the analysis is that it does not recognize some keywords. For instance, globalization and technology have been used to justify the research study, yet are not included in the keywords. The lack of said keywords makes the research confusing.
Also important to note, the report consists of more literature review than results and findings (Walliman 14). For scientific studies, it is expected that the results and conclusions cover a bigger part of the report. It can be argued that the purpose of the research changed, thus, the minimal results and findings section. However, as mentioned, the scholars adhered to their hypotheses and proved them right. Thus, the report should have acceded to the general expectations of similar scientific reports. Overall, the research report offers great insights regarding the topic at hand. However, it is not well organized, and this brings about confusion.
Summary of the Case
The case study proposes three hypotheses that the researchers try to prove right. The first suggestion, identified as the primary hypothesis, is the inverted U-shape relationship between cognitive dissonance and learning work behavior (Dechawatanapaisal and Siengthai 44). The researchers can prove the theory right through their survey. The study shows that there is an inverted relationship between cognitive dissonance condition and learning work behavior is found (r ¼ 20:43; p 0:01) (Dechawatanapaisal and Siengthai 48). The researchers explain that the findings show that the relationship between the two variables mentioned, is, however, not U-shaped. The realization goes hand in hand with the assumption that was discussed earlier.
The second hypothesis “effective HR practices related to staffing, training and development, performance appraisal, and rewards are inversely related to cognitive dissonance” (Dechawatanapaisal and Siengthai 46) is also proved true, to a large extent. The findings demonstrate that staffing, training and development, and performance appraisal ae all affected by cognitive dissonance. However, rewards do not have a direct tie to cognitive dissonance. Regarding managerial application, therefore, it can be argued that rewards should not be used as a motivation for organizational learning.
The third hypothesis tested is “the effective HR practices that are related to staffing, training and development, performance appraisal, and rewards are positively associated with learning work behavior” (Dechawatanapaisal and Siengthai 46) is proven true and strengthens the results and findings recorded through the testing of the second hypothesis.
Works Cited
Dechawatanapaisal, Decha, and Sununta, Siengthai. “The impact of cognitive dissonance on learning work behavior.” Journal of Workplace Learning, vol. 18, no. 1, 2006, pp. 42-54.
Griffin, W. Ricky and Gregory, Moorhead. Organizational behavior: Managing people and organizations. Mason, OH: Cengage, 2013.
Holloway, Immy and Lorraine, Brown. Essentials of a qualitative doctorate. New York, NY: Routledge, 2016.
Sugar, William and Kenneth Luterbach. “Using critical incidents of instructional design and multimedia production activities to investigate instructional designers’ current practices and roles.” Educational Technology Research & Development, vol. 64, no. 2, 2016, pp. 285-312.
Walliman, Nicholas. Your research project: Designing and planning your work. London, UK: Sage, 2011.
Sagini, M. Meshack. Globalization: The paradox of organizational behavior: Terrorism, foreign policy and governance. New York, NY: Rowman & Littlefield, 2014.