Editing Cognitive dissonance (section)

== Examples ==
[[File:The Fox and the Grapes.jpg|thumb|In the fable of "The Fox and the Grapes", by [[Aesop]], on failing to reach the desired bunch of grapes, the fox then decides he does not truly want the fruit because it is sour. The fox's act of [[Rationalization (psychology)|rationalization (justification)]] reduced his [[anxiety]] over the cognitive dissonance from the desire he cannot realise.]]

===Meat-eating===
Meat-eating can involve discrepancies between the behavior of eating meat and various ideals that the person holds.<ref name="Rothgerber">{{cite journal | vauthors = Rothgerber H | title = Meat-related cognitive dissonance: A conceptual framework for understanding how meat eaters reduce negative arousal from eating animals | journal = Appetite | volume = 146 | pages = 104511 | date = March 2020 | pmid = 31707073 | doi = 10.1016/j.appet.2019.104511 | publisher = Elsevier | s2cid = 207936313 | id = 104511 }}</ref> Some researchers call this form of moral conflict the ''[[meat paradox]]''.<ref name="Loughnan">{{cite journal | vauthors = Loughnan S, Bastian B, Haslam N | title = The Psychology of Eating Animals | journal = Current Directions in Psychological Science | volume = 23 | issue = 2 | pages = 104–108 | publisher = Sage Journals | date = 2014 | doi = 10.1177/0963721414525781 | s2cid = 145339463 }}</ref><ref name="Bastian">{{cite journal | vauthors = Bastian B, Loughnan S | title = Resolving the Meat-Paradox: A Motivational Account of Morally Troublesome Behavior and Its Maintenance | journal = Personality and Social Psychology Review | volume = 21 | issue = 3 | pages = 278–299 | date = August 2017 | pmid = 27207840 | doi = 10.1177/1088868316647562 | publisher = Sage Journals | hdl = 20.500.11820/fd429082-c209-4a46-abb8-097e2fd9d5ac | s2cid = 13360236 | url = https://www.pure.ed.ac.uk/ws/files/25381242/Bastian_Loughnan_2016_PSPR_meat_paradox.pdf | id = 27207840 }}</ref> Hank Rothgerber posited that meat eaters may encounter a conflict between their eating behavior and their affections toward animals.<ref name="Rothgerber"/> This occurs when the dissonant state involves recognition of one's behavior as a meat eater and a belief, attitude, or value that this behavior contradicts.<ref name="Rothgerber"/> The person with this state may attempt to employ various methods, including avoidance, willful ignorance, dissociation, perceived behavioral change, and do-gooder derogation to prevent this form of dissonance from occurring.<ref name="Rothgerber"/> Once occurred, they may reduce it in the form of [[motivated cognition]]s, such as denigrating animals, offering pro-meat justifications, or denying responsibility for eating meat.<ref name="Rothgerber"/>

The extent of cognitive dissonance with regard to meat eating can vary depending on the attitudes and values of the individual involved because these can affect whether or not they see any moral conflict with their values and what they eat. For example, individuals who are more dominance minded and who value having a masculine identity are less likely to experience cognitive dissonance because they are less likely to believe eating meat is morally wrong.<ref name="Loughnan"/> Others cope with this cognitive dissonance often through ignorance (ignoring the known realities of their food source) or explanations loosely tied to taste. The psychological phenomenon intensifies if mind or human-like qualities of animals are explicitly mentioned.<ref name="Loughnan"/>

===Smoking===
The study ''Patterns of Cognitive Dissonance-reducing Beliefs Among Smokers: A Longitudinal Analysis from the International Tobacco Control (ITC) Four Country Survey'' (2012) indicated that smokers use justification beliefs to reduce their cognitive dissonance about [[smoking tobacco]] and the negative consequences of smoking it.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.libcblog.nl/articles/facing-the-facts-the-cognitive-dissonance-behind-smoking|title=LIBC Blog – Articles – Facing the facts: The cognitive dissonance behind smoking|website=www.libcblog.nl|date=16 June 2015 |language=en|access-date=2019-10-17}}</ref>

# Continuing smokers (Smoking and no attempt to quit since the previous round of study)
# Successful quitters (Quit during the study and did not use tobacco from the time of the previous round of study)
# Failed quitters (Quit during the study, but relapsed to smoking at the time of the study)

To reduce cognitive dissonance, the participant smokers adjusted their beliefs to correspond with their actions:

# Functional beliefs ("Smoking calms me down when I am stressed or upset."; "Smoking helps me concentrate better."; "Smoking is an important part of my life."; and "Smoking makes it easier for me to [[socialize]].")
# Risk-minimizing beliefs ("The [[Hierarchy of evidence|medical evidence]] that smoking is harmful is exaggerated."; "One has to die of something, so why not enjoy yourself and smoke?"; and "Smoking is no more risky than many other things people do.")<ref>{{cite journal | vauthors = Fotuhi O, Fong GT, Zanna MP, Borland R, Yong HH, Cummings KM | title = Patterns of cognitive dissonance-reducing beliefs among smokers: a longitudinal analysis from the International Tobacco Control (ITC) Four Country Survey | journal = Tobacco Control | volume = 22 | issue = 1 | pages = 52–58 | date = January 2013 | pmid = 22218426 | pmc = 4009366 | doi = 10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2011-050139 }}</ref>

=== Littering ===
Disposing of trash outside, even when knowing this is against the law, wrong, and is harmful for the environment, is a prominent example of cognitive dissonance, especially if the person feels bad after [[littering]] but continues to do so.

Between November 2015 and March 2016, a study by Xitou Nature Education Area in Taiwan examined littering of tourists. Researchers analyzed the relationships between tourists' environmental attitudes, cognitive dissonance, and [[vandalism]].<ref name=":4" /> In this study, 500 questionnaires were distributed and 499 questionnaires were returned.<ref name=":4">{{Cite journal |last1=Wu |first1=Jing-Han |last2=Lin |first2=Hsing-Wei |last3=Liu |first3=Wan-Yu |date=2020-11-01 |title=Tourists' environmental vandalism and cognitive dissonance in a National Forest Park |url=https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1618866720306622 |journal=Urban Forestry & Urban Greening |language=en |volume=55 |pages=126845 |doi=10.1016/j.ufug.2020.126845 |bibcode=2020UFUG...5526845W |s2cid=225297238 |issn=1618-8667|url-access=subscription }}</ref> The results of this study indicate that older tourists had better attitudes towards the environment and cared more. The tourists who were older and cared more for outdoor activities were less likely to litter. On the other hand, the younger tourists littered more and experienced more cognitive dissonance.<ref name=":4" /> This study showed that younger tourists littered more as a whole and regretted or thought about it after.<ref name=":4" />

=== Unpleasant medical screenings ===
In a study titled ''Cognitive Dissonance and Attitudes Toward Unpleasant Medical Screenings '' (2016), researchers Michael R. Ent and Mary A. Gerend informed the study participants about a discomforting test for a specific (fictitious) virus called the "human respiratory virus-27". The study used a fake virus to prevent participants from having thoughts, opinions, and feeling about the virus that would interfere with the experiment. The study participants were in two groups; one group was told that they were actual candidates for the virus-27 test, and the second group were told they were not candidates for the test. The researchers reported, "We predicted that [study] participants who thought that they were candidates for the unpleasant test would experience dissonance associated with knowing that the test was both unpleasant and in their best interest—this dissonance was predicted to result in unfavorable attitudes toward the test."<ref>{{cite journal | vauthors = Ent MR, Gerend MA | title = Cognitive dissonance and attitudes toward unpleasant medical screenings | journal = Journal of Health Psychology | volume = 21 | issue = 9 | pages = 2075–2084 | date = September 2016 | pmid = 27535832 | doi = 10.1177/1359105315570986 | s2cid = 6606644 }}</ref>

=== Related phenomena ===
Cognitive dissonance may also occur when people seek to explain or justify their beliefs, often without questioning the validity of their claims. After the [[1934 Nepal–India earthquake|earthquake of 1934, Bihar, India]], irrational rumors based upon fear quickly reached the adjoining communities unaffected by the disaster because those people, although not in physical danger, psychologically justified their anxieties about the earthquake.<ref name="Prasad1950">{{cite journal | vauthors = Prasad J | year = 1950 | title = A Comparative Study of Rumours and Reports in Earthquakes | doi = 10.1111/j.2044-8295.1950.tb00271.x | journal = British Journal of Psychology | volume = 41 | issue = 3–4| pages = 129–144 }}</ref> The same pattern can be observed when one's convictions are met with a contradictory order. In a study conducted among 6th grade students, after being induced to cheat in an academic examination, students judged cheating less harshly.<ref name="Mills1958">{{cite journal| vauthors = Mills J |year=1958 |title=Changes in Moral Attitudes Following Temptation |journal=Journal of Personality |volume=26 |issue=4 |pages=517–531 |doi=10.1111/j.1467-6494.1958.tb02349.x }}</ref> Nonetheless, the [[confirmation bias]] identifies how people readily read information that confirms their established opinions and readily avoid reading information that contradicts their opinions.<ref name="HartEtAl_FeelingValidatedVersusBeingCorrect">{{cite journal | vauthors = Hart W, Albarracín D, Eagly AH, Brechan I, Lindberg MJ, Merrill L | title = Feeling validated versus being correct: a meta-analysis of selective exposure to information | journal = Psychological Bulletin | volume = 135 | issue = 4 | pages = 555–588 | date = July 2009 | pmid = 19586162 | pmc = 4797953 | doi = 10.1037/a0015701 }}</ref> The confirmation bias is apparent when a person confronts deeply held political beliefs, i.e. when a person is greatly committed to their beliefs, values, and ideas.<ref name="HartEtAl_FeelingValidatedVersusBeingCorrect" />

If a contradiction occurs between how a person feels and how a person acts, one's perceptions and emotions align to alleviate stress. The [[Ben Franklin effect]] refers to that statesman's observation that the act of performing a favor for a rival leads to increased positive feelings toward that individual. It is also possible that one's emotions be altered to minimize the regret of irrevocable choices. At a [[hippodrome]], bettors had more confidence in their horses after the betting than before.<ref name="Knox&Inkster1968">{{cite journal | vauthors = Knox RE, Inkster JA | title = Postdecision dissonance at post time | journal = Journal of Personality and Social Psychology | volume = 8 | issue = 4 | pages = 319–323 | date = April 1968 | pmid = 5645589 | doi = 10.1037/h0025528 }}</ref>