Most of us like to think we are unique or special in some way. And yet, we often avoid telling others our raw, unfiltered life stories.

Stories that would reveal our complex, multi-faceted, imperfect selves if we did.

Stories that would leave us with a permanent vulnerability hangover, especially if they are stories that demand that we reveal our hidden emotions.

Instead, we seek to explain our lives in ways that we and others can understand and appreciate within a framework of acceptable societal norms.

Ways that limit our exposure to possibly being misunderstood, embarrassed or judged. Ways that demand we take a risk and perhaps fail.

For this reason, we usually avoid sharing our more quirky behaviours, immoral or scandalous affairs, private thoughts, odd plans, and silly comments.

And we especially do not share our authentic, unfiltered, heartfelt emotions.

Imagine if all that came out wrong (as judged by our ever-vigilant, ever so "correct" cognitive selves).

For the same reason, we also downplay some of our worst decisions and gloss over major personal failures or tragedies. After all, we don't want others to see us as shady characters or to pity us.

So, we bend the truth a little.

And in instances where we hold steadfast beliefs, we are unlikely to be persuaded to change our views. Not even if we are confronted by the most compelling facts that prove we are wrong.

We do all this because we subconsciously know our society's standards (and those that matter the most to us) for judging whether our life is worthy and respectable.

And we all want to feel worthy and respectable (especially to those who matter to us).

For example, let's say that society values independence, fairness, dedication to your career, love for family, support for friends, and financial responsibility.

But you, conversely, have a carefree spirit and an extraordinary sense of adventure that leads you to travel extensively, move from job to job, see your family infrequently and avoid long-term relationships.

In such an example, your stories will generally reflect the themes you believe you will judged by, but your beliefs, values and actions will not be in sync with these.

This lack of synchronicity will create significant psychological discomfort called "Cognitive Dissonance"—a term coined by psychologist Leon Festinger in the 1950s.

This dissonance is the pain you feel when you hold two conflicting beliefs or when your behaviour doesn't align with your beliefs. It can also arise from a perceived need to suppress emotions.

People who experience dissonance but cannot resolve it may feel powerless or guilty.

So, to reduce this dissonance, you must either change your attitudes, beliefs, or behaviours or rationalize and create explanations to bridge the gap, thus restoring mental balance and emotional harmony.

To illustrate this, imagine you've just splurged on an expensive pair of shoes.

They're stylish but far from practical, and now your budget is tighter than a pair of skinny jeans. A little voice in your head starts whispering: "Was that a good idea?"

So how do you resolve this? What elaborate stories do you tell yourself to make sense of your actions?

THE MECHANISMS OF COGNITIVE DISSONANCE

When your actions and beliefs are out of sync, you experience an inner conflict. This cognitive dissonance is like an itch that needs to be scratched. To reduce this discomfort, you have a few options:

1. Change the Behaviour

Admit the shoes were a mistake and return them.

2. Change the Belief

Convince yourself that these shoes are an investment in your wardrobe.

3. Add a New Cognition

Tell yourself that you deserve a treat after a tough week at work.

More often than not, changing your beliefs or adding new justifications is easier. It is where the stories you tell yourself come into play. These stories help you maintain a sense of consistency and self-integrity.

THE STORIES WE TELL OURSELVES

Humans are natural storytellers. When faced with cognitive dissonance, we weave narratives that reconcile our actions with our self-image. Let's delve into a few examples to see how this plays out.

Example 1: The Smoker's Dilemma

Consider Jane, a long-time smoker who knows smoking is bad for her health. Every cigarette she lights up creates cognitive dissonance: she enjoys smoking but believes it's harmful.

To ease this discomfort, Jane might tell herself, "I'll quit eventually, but right now, I'm just too stressed to stop." Alternatively, she might downplay the risks by saying, "My grandmother smoked her whole life and lived to 90."

These stories help Jane justify her smoking and reduce the dissonance between her actions and her knowledge of the health risks.

Example 2: The Environmentalist's Quandary

Tom prides himself on being environmentally conscious. He recycles, avoids plastic, and bikes to work. However, he loves travelling and often flies for vacations.

The contradiction between his environmental values and his flying habits creates dissonance. To resolve this, Tom might tell himself, "I only fly a few times a year, so it's not that bad," or "I'll offset my carbon footprint by donating to environmental causes."

These rationalizations allow Tom to maintain his self-image as an environmentalist while continuing to enjoy his travels.

COGNITIVE DISSONANCE IN EVERYDAY LIFE

Cognitive dissonance isn't limited to big decisions or apparent contradictions.

It can be found in everyday situations, influencing the little stories we create to justify our choices and maintain a coherent self-image.

Example 3: The Dieter's Cheat Day

Imagine Sarah, who is committed to a strict diet. One evening, she finds herself reaching for a piece of cake.

This action conflicts with her dieting goals, causing dissonance. Sarah might think, "It's okay to indulge once in a while; I've been so good all week," or "I'll work out extra hard tomorrow to burn off these calories."

These narratives help Sarah align her indulgence with her dieting self-identity.

Example 4: The Impulsive Shopper

Mark is trying to save money for a big purchase, but he can't resist buying a new gadget on sale.

The cognitive dissonance between his saving goal and impulsive spending leads Mark to justify the purchase by thinking, "It was a great deal; I'm actually saving money in the long run," or "I'll just cut back on other expenses this month."

Through these stories, Mark mitigates the discomfort and preserves his sense of being financially responsible.

Cognitive dissonance can also arise from the suppression of emotions, which often involves telling ourselves stories to justify why we are not acknowledging or expressing our true feelings.

Example 5: The Overworked Employee

Consider Alex, who is overwhelmed with work but prides himself on being dependable and hardworking.

Despite feeling stressed and burned out, Alex suppresses his emotions, thinking, “Complaining won’t help; I need to push through for the sake of my team.”

The dissonance between his emotional state and his belief in the importance of resilience creates discomfort.

To reduce this dissonance, Alex might tell himself, “Everyone feels this way; it’s normal,” or “Once this project is over, things will improve.”

These justifications help Alex maintain his self-image as a reliable employee while ignoring his emotional needs.

Example 6: The Unhappy Relationship

Rachel is in a long-term relationship that no longer makes her happy, but she values commitment and fears being alone.

The cognitive dissonance between her dissatisfaction and her belief in staying together leads her to suppress her feelings. She might think, “Every relationship has its ups and downs; this is just a rough patch,” or “I’m overreacting; things aren’t that bad.”

These narratives allow Rachel to reconcile her discontent with her desire to uphold her commitment, even at the expense of her emotional well-being.

THE BROADER IMPLICATIONS

Cognitive dissonance doesn't just shape our personal lives; it has significant societal implications.

It plays a role in politics, marketing, and social behaviour. Politicians and marketers, for example, often exploit cognitive dissonance to influence opinions and behaviours.

Political Example: The Voter's Paradox

A voter who strongly supports a political party may experience dissonance when that party's policies contradict their values.

To reduce this discomfort, the voter might rationalize, "This policy isn't ideal, but it's a small price to pay for the greater good," or "The other party is much worse."

By telling these stories, the voter maintains their loyalty and reduces dissonance.

Marketing Example: The Brand Loyalist

Consider a consumer who always buys products from a particular brand, even if competitors offer better options.

The dissonance between their loyalty and the reality of better alternatives might be reduced by thinking, "I've always trusted this brand; they must know what they're doing," or "Switching brands is too much hassle."

Marketers leverage this tendency by reinforcing positive narratives about their brands.

Cognitive dissonance is a powerful force that shapes our thoughts, behaviours, and the stories we tell ourselves.

It drives us to seek consistency and resolve conflicts between our actions and beliefs, often through rationalisations and justifications.

Understanding this phenomenon sheds light on our personal decisions and offers insight into broader social and cultural dynamics.

By recognizing the role of cognitive dissonance in our lives, we can become more aware of the narratives we construct and strive for greater self-awareness and authenticity.

So when you catch yourself spinning a story to justify a questionable choice, or cover up your surpressed emotions, remember it's just your mind's way of scratching that cognitive itch.

Until next time, don’t believe all the stories you tell yourself.

Dion Le Roux

References

1. Aronson, E. (1999). *The Social Animal*. Worth Publishers.

2. Festinger, L. (1957). *A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance*. Stanford University Press.

3. Harmon-Jones, E., & Mills, J. (Eds.). (2019). *Cognitive Dissonance: Reexamining a Pivotal Theory in Psychology*. American Psychological Association.

4. Tavris, C., & Aronson, E. (2007). *Mistakes Were Made (But Not by Me): Why We Justify Foolish Beliefs, Bad Decisions, and Hurtful Acts*. Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.