Infidelity and Cognitive Dissonance

Infidelity and Cognitive Dissonance

{Collaborated by E. Noori, T. Norton, R. Rinaudo, C. Swarmer, and A. Thompson}

An individual faces decisions every day. An important aspect in the decision making process is justification. Individuals seek justification for the decision made. However, at times a person holds two contradictory cognitions (Author Unknown, 2011). This conflict is called cognitive dissonance. When faced with a situation such as infidelity, an individual’s behavior may differ from his or her morals. The relationship between behavior and attitude is a complex one. There are several theories associated with a decision such as infidelity. Two of these theories are attribution theory and cognitive dissonance theory.

A married middle-aged woman decides to go out on the town with her friends to celebrate her birthday. She decides to go with her friends because her husband forgot her birthday. While out, she meets a young attentive man and has several drinks with him. She makes the decision that she is going to sleep with him regardless of her 13 years of marriage.  She never tells her husband about that night, but feels as if she was justified in doing so because her birthday slipped his mind. Her behavior of infidelity was manifested through both environmental situations, as well as thought processing. The woman’s subsequent behavior reflects self-justification to rationalize her actions. She had never before justified any reason for cheating. This decision went against her moral and cultural belief in the sanctity of marriage.

Attribution Theory is the way in which individuals clarify or identify how others behave (Myers, 2010). Within Attribution Theory, there are internal motives and external situations that enlighten the reasoning behind ones actions and behavior. Internal attribution is related to the traits of the individual, whereas external attribution relates to environmental or situation surrounding the behavior or action. Internal motives, or dispositional attribution, in the case of this woman, may have been due to lack of respect for her husband, because she believes he has no respect for her since he did not remember her birthday. She may be the type of person who is selfish, and instead of talking out her concerns with her husband she decides to seek revenge to satisfy her needs at the moment. External motives, or situational attribution, in her case may be because she was out with friends, had a few drinks, and excited about someone else being interested in her. She may have felt good at that time to be needed and able to satisfy someone else; when she thought maybe she could not do so for her husband. She may not have realized until she had already committed the act, that she was wrong.

Since the act of adultery is against her moral and cultural belief in the sanctity of marriage, she may decide to eventually confess her infidelity to her husband.  This may allow her to determine whether her actions are justified or unjustified based on her husband’s reaction. Her husband may make attributions about her infidelity, and whatever his thoughts are will influence each one’s response to the behaviors. His reactions may be negative and this may end in dissolution of their marriage. If his reactions are negative, but forgiving, this may allow her to find reassured that their marriage is salvageable. Both internal and external attributions will impact the future of this marriage, whether it be honored or dissolved.

An attitude is a person’s positive or negative thoughts that are concerned with the performance of their behavior. Attitudes define our ways of experiences. What we move towards to or away from; what we like or dislike. An attitude is a mode of behavior that is thought to be typical response of an individual. Often associated with personality and can influence behavior.

Attitudes are a collection of thoughts and beliefs that are created around specific items in our environment. People create associates between certain kinds of thoughts and beliefs. Attitudes are based on values, which people typically derive from family. There are three key components of attitudes, the cognitive, affective and behavioral. It is important to break these components down because each of them is slightly different from the other. The cognitive component is the beliefs people hold about the purpose of an attitude. The affective component is the emotional feelings stimulated by a purpose of thought. The behavioral component is a predisposition to act in certain ways towards an attitude purpose. These make up the behavioral components of attitudes. Psychologists have confirmed that these three components play into a person’s overall attitude.

The theory of planned behavior claims that an individual behavior is determined by behavioral intentions. Behavioral intentions are the role of an individual’s attitude is in the direction of the behavior and subjective norms contiguous to the performance of the behavior. Attitude is influenced by the behavioral beliefs about the consequences of carrying out the behavior and the outcome evolution, the positive or negative of the consequences. In additions to attitudes there are the subjective norms. It is the degree to which the person feels social pressure to carry out a behavior. The subjective norm is predicted by normative beliefs and motivation to comply (Park, 1998). Normative belief is the perceptions about the expectations of significant others. Motivation of comply is the perceived expectations of others. Perceived behavioral control consists of control beliefs and control frequency. Control beliefs are the degree of personal control, the individual perceives he or she has over the behavior in question. Control frequency is how often those barriers occur. Perceived behavioral control affects both intention and behavior.

            According to Bing Dictionary dissonance is a situation in which ideas or actions are opposed to each other. The purpose of cognitive dissonance theory is to change the attitude of the participants to take responsibilities for his or her actions. Cognitive dissonance theory believes that if a person can own or take responsibility for his or her negative actions they are more likely to change the behavior (Cheng & Hsu, 2012). On the opposing side, if an individual is not willing to accept his or her consequences the behavior is likely to continue. Under dissonance theory the individual must come to the conclusion that he or she made a conscious choice for his or her actions (Cheng & Hsu, 2012). “Cognitive dissonance theory assumes that to reduce discomfort, we justify our actions to ourselves (Myers, 2012 p.140).”

              Infidelity, a touching yet interesting topic follows logical reasoning for how dissonance theory could easily explain the behavior. Rationalizing infidelity under the dissonance theory, by the individual who committed infidelity is to find a way to help take responsibility for the behavior. Rationalizations for this behavior include him or her made me do it and if they had been more aware of my feelings and needs this would have never happened. The outcome for dissonance theory is for the individual rationalizing his or her behavior would be to have him or her start the process of admitting the negative actions. The admitting of the negative actions would include the flaws that lead to the distance between the couple.

              Infidelity is a behavior that contradicts many individual’s morals. An individual’s behavior is usually a reflection of his or her attitudes. However, at times an individual’s behavior contradicts his or her attitude. When this conflict occurs, the individual begins to justify or rationalize the reasons for his or her behavior. This justification can be attempted using attribution or cognitive dissonance theory. The individual must be prepared for the consequences of his or her behavior.

  

References

Author Unknown (2011). Psychsmart. New York, NY: McGraw Hill.

Cheng, P., & Hsu, P. (2012). Cognitive Dissonance Theory and the certification examination:

            The role of responsibility. Social Behavior and Personality, 40(7), 1103-1111.

Hall, J. H., & Fincham, F. D. (2006). Relationship dissolution following infidelity: The roles of

            attributions and forgiveness. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 25(5), 508-522.

Myers, D. G. (2010). Social Psychology (10th ed.). New York, NY: McGraw Hill.

Park, H. S. (1998). The theory of reasoned action and self - construal in predicting intention of

            studying among Korean college students. Communication Research Reports, 15(3), 267-279.

Plagiarism:

Using someone else's work without giving proper credit, is plagiarism. If you use our work, please reference it.