The article by Stone & Cooper, (2001 pp. 228-243) assessed the role of cognitions on self-arousal and reduction process of cognitive dissonances. Various researches have been conducted for a long time and researches have often differed on different approaches used to highlight the issue. Other perspectives maintain cognitions concerning self-standards and expectancies which aid in dissonance arousal. Theories have been proposed to justify and argue on cognitions role in cognitive dissonance. The article addresses and assesses this narrative based on different theories in place. Theories and research conducted have highlighted that cognition on self-care often relevant to dissonance process reduction. Various narratives have been laid but critical assessment and consensus have failed to materialize over the years on self-thoughts can aid reduction of cognitive dissonance.
The contemporary dissonances revisions among the highlighted theories often have assumptions that dissonance begins when people engage in certain behavior and then make decisions on set standards of behavior. In this case, each approach makes different self-evaluations approaches on self-knowledge mediation on dissonance through the assumption of different self-attributes and standards which are critical in measuring behavior based on different parameters.
The article has developed and introduced a comprehensive model which tries to accommodate new synthesis on the different perspective roles medicating arousal and decreasing reduction of cognitive dissonance. The proposed model further intends to highlight a compressive process pathway on how dissonance is aroused and decreased.
The author has come up with a new model which aims at designing and forging a better outcome synthesis across the different approaches to the self-dissonance role. Further a process which aims at how dissonance is aroused and reduced. According to the author, dissonance begins when people make commitments on behavior and then make an assessment on the behavior against a more meaningful process based on a judgment criterion. When an action is being measured against the key criterion, an assessment is undertaken to assess whether it takes on an aversive process to threaten an individual. This model further assesses how behavior is presented in memory as self-attributes and self-standards guides for behavior actions.
The self-standards model for cognitive development as proposed by this article views the role of self-thought through various perspectives on dissonance functions on the accessibility of different types of attributes. Having a basic cope of the different competing viewpoints entails understanding the description involved in the representation of self-attributes and standards and the overall discrepancies based on personal and normative self-standards.
Through a critical assessment point of view on how the accessibility of relevant attributes and self-standards influence quality perceptions on quality appropriateness, the self-standards model, in this case, is able to predict how self-concept differences moderate dissonance processes. The model offers prediction on the self attributes conditions and expectancy relayed, conditions through which the people gets motivated, conditions for motivation, how self esteem differences will moderate dissonance reduction using direct and indirect means.
The author tries to highlight on the processing implicit with respect to each contemporary perspective. The comprehensive model assesses how and why cognitions on self-influence dissonance process and arousal. Further, in establishing the context of a self-standards model with respect to different contradictory predictions, the author examines three key contemporary theories on self-dissonance.
The article has focussed on a systematic review of three theories touching on their perspectives. This assessment seeks to establish what is known on the role of self on dissonance. The first theory reviewed assess on self as expectancy in dissonance processes. The key perspective on the conditions on self-has the basis to serve as behavior expectancies. Based on self-consistency theory, people have innate expectations for competing and moral behavior which derives from morals in conventional society and the prevailing social values in place. Dissonance on the other end is aroused when a person has a perception of discrepancy behavior and their individual personal standards. The reduction dissonance is thus geared towards maintenance of competing for sense and morality through the moral justification of discrepant behavior process. Further, the self-consistency proposal depicts that self-esteem offers moderations on dissonance arousal process due to perception contribution which constitutes immoral acts or expectancies which hold behavior.
Further, a review on self as a resource in dissonance process has been depicted from self-affirmation theory. Just like the self-consistency theory, this theoretical perspective points out at how dissonance is aroused when there is an engagement in actions which pose threat to self-concept principles. Self-affirmation theory lays the primary goal of dissonance on reduction processes with a goal to restore the adaptive and moral integrity of self-esteem in general. The goal is accomplished by focusing on positive aspect of self which holds critical importance. The accessibility of positive cognitions on self-allows people to reduce psychology discomfort without directly dealing with discrepant conditions. Further, the self-resource model represents dispositional availability into positive cognitions on self and dissonance reductions.
The last review theory considered in this article suggests that self and self-esteem ascertaining relevance on dissonance arousal and reduction avenues. In the new look model, dissonance is raised when there is discrepant behavior change for behavioral conduct. The key assumption is that people learn as children so as to monitor their actions and what their peers regard as an appropriate behavior.
The new look behavior assumes that most people ascribe to similar social norms of behavior, and then dissonance is not predicated on the availability of self-esteem. The new look model cognitions on the self-has special role in dissonance process which makes many people be vulnerable when they think their behaviors has deviated from the normal norms.
In general, each of the major theoretical perspectives reviewed makes specific predictions on how cognition and its relations to a self-mediated process of dissonance which is linked to self-mediate processes. Thus the systematic review of the three key theories lays into perspective what is known and established based on self-dissonance behavior. This informs a critical perspective on the development of the new model proposed by the author.
Main Conclusions
The study has advocated for the new unifying model advocating on the roles of self-standards in dissonance process as a key tool. The three major theoretical views highlighted offers the unique contribution to the understanding of self-cognitions mediating cognitive dissonance arousal and reduction process. In order to link the various perspectives into a unifying model, a comprehensive model is essential to establish this relationship. Each perspective on the self-makes specific description of the important piece on self-dissonance which makes an assumption as to how people think about behavior. Thus each model seeks dissonance on the assumption of the people and then makes n attempt on how to resolve the discrepancy.
The proposed self-standards model engages in various steps which determine behavior change as immoral and thus being discrepant from other cognitions. The model offers prediction the evaluation of behavior based on shared, normative considerations based on good, foolish and immoral. The model further maintains that standards interpretation and evaluation meaning of behaviors determines the overall determination of self and self-esteem in the process of dissonance arousal. The prediction of the self-standards model is that normative standards are primarily accessible through individual differences in self-esteem which do not moderately affect dissonance processes because the shared evaluation will not cause any deviation. Further, the self-standards model predicts positive self-attributes which operate as a resource for dissonance reactions, while when irrelevant positive attributes are accessible, positive dissonance are reduced thus shifting attention from individual discrepancy reducing the negative effects.
Thus the model has illuminated on the processes which people assess the importance of behavior. The focus of the model aims at assessing on cognitive processes which people interpret behavior and detect any discrepancy behavior, experience and label their arousal behavior and seek avenues of how to reduce it.
The new perception of the self-standards model in self-consistency is very vital in people expectancies. Dissonance is often aroused through the perceived discrepancy between behavior and personal standards on competence and morality. The reduction process observed is aimed at maintaining a sense of morality and competence through the appropriate justification of discrepant behavior. Self-esteem is able to moderate on dissonance arousal pathways. Dissonance as an observed is caused by engaging on actors which pose threat to self-concept. Self-esteem presents irrelevant concerns on dissonance arousal and reductions. Future dissonance arises when discordant behavior is met. The effect of self-standards is critical for understanding the role of self in cognitive dissonance process.
Evaluation of cognitive dissonance theory, suggest a discrepancy reduction process which entails the individual capability to reduce the dissonance through altering cognitions. Social psychology has shown that the primary focus on discrepancy nature often leads to a reduction that occurs in response to dissonance. However other studies do not predict dissonance discrepancy but instead identify negative consequences arising from unresolved dissonance which are laid down through set standards alienating positive and negative levels of cognitive behavior, (Grandey, Chi, & Diamond, 2013 pp.569-612; Kammeyer-Mueller, Simon, & Rich, 2012 pp.784-808).
Key CDT Concepts and Approach suggest that people struggle for behavior consistency whenever possible which leads to dissonance on individuals to invest more time in decision-making process though self-standards.
Counter rational behaviors have been noted in this scenarios, Pugh, Groth, and Hennig-Thurau (2011 p. 377) suggest that emotional expression moderates negative relationships between surface and creating jobs which are high strength in the expression of emotions, in this way adopting self-standards to make boundaries on cognitive behavior is fundamental. Cognitive discrepancies often arise in employees and lead to conflicts in organizational values. This lack of self-regulating standards for both individuals and organizations can lead to lower job satisfaction, (Grandey Chi, & Diamond, 2013). Further, a study conducted by Bhave and Glomb, (2016 pp.722-741 ) on organizational employees showed that occupational labor requirements often lead to dissonance if there is conflict on the self-concept with the organization rules. Thus self-standards can be in conflict with organizational requirements causing deviant behavior on cognitive dissonance among individuals. Based on teamwork assessment, the self-standards model showed that low supervision focussed interpersonal process lead to team dissonance due to a violation of normative standards for respectful treatment.
The author Stone &Copper, (2000) in this article proposed a model on self-standards suggest that the basis of dissonance is played by cognitions on self largely depend on standards set and made accessible for the behavior attributes. The individual self-standards assess the social appropriateness of behavior and usage of self-attributes tends to reduce discomfort. The model tends to predict conditions of contemporary vie on self dissonance which offers accurate process of dissonance arousal and reduction process.
Cognitive dissonance describes the overall feelings relayed by discomfort which often results from beliefs which counter run on behaviors or occur when new information is presented. People tend to identify and be consistent with the attitudes and perceptions. People often experience dissonance behavior when the outcomes are in direct conflict to their shared representation of what their behavior should be. Majority of the people will often experience dissonance behavior irrespective of the idiosyncratic difference in self-knowledge assessment which primarily focuses on normative standards of the situation. Thus the self-standards model proposition those personal standards are effective in setting inward idiosyncratic behavior. However, people often have low and high esteem on different expectations on their behavior. Hence inducing personal standards may accelerate self-awareness which causes more dissonance among the people in general.
Conclusion
In essence, cognitive dissonance resonates around the individual behavior which often comes into conflict with own beliefs and attitudes. A case example is when a person smokes even they recognize it is negative on their health, they encounter cognitive dissonance. Thus their attributed behavior is inconsistent with their beliefs at that moment. The overall effect is feelings of discomfort and modification of either attitude or behavior. Introduction self-standards in this state of action is critical. Setting personal smoking standards and self-regulating norms to protect oneself is critical. Application of self-esteem to the emphasis on personal standards in assessing behavior s critical for self-attributes which motivates reduction of dissonance through self-justification. However, the self-standards model cannot offer the prediction in organizational contexts as the organizational rules and regulations tend to conflict with personal standards leading to reduce overall output. Hence recognition of self-standards is critical in assessing behavior dissonance in predictive human social behavior.
References
Bhave, D.P. and Glomb, T.M., 2016. The role of occupational emotional labor requirements on the surface acting–job satisfaction relationship. Journal of Management, 42(3), pp.722-741.
Grandey, A.A., Chi, N.W. and Diamond, J.A., 2013. Show me the money! Do financial rewards for performance enhance or undermine the satisfaction from emotional labor?. Personnel Psychology, 66(3), pp.569-612.
Kammeyer-Mueller, J.D., Simon, L.S. and Rich, B.L., 2012. The psychic cost of doing wrong: Ethical conflict, divestiture socialization, and emotional exhaustion. Journal of management, 38(3), pp.784-808.
Pugh, S.D., Groth, M. and Hennig-Thurau, T., 2011. Willing and able to fake emotions: A closer examination of the link between emotional dissonance and employee well-being. Journal of Applied Psychology, 96(2), p.377.
Simon, L., Greenberg, J. and Brehm, J., 1995. Trivialization: the forgotten mode of dissonance reduction. Journal of personality and social psychology, 68(2), p.247.
Stone, J. and Cooper, J., 2001. A self-standards model of cognitive dissonance. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 37(3), pp.228-243.
Essay Writing Service Features
Our Experience
No matter how complex your assignment is, we can find the right professional for your specific task. Contact Essay is an essay writing company that hires only the smartest minds to help you with your projects. Our expertise allows us to provide students with high-quality academic writing, editing & proofreading services.
Free Features
Free revision policy
$10Free bibliography & reference
$8Free title page
$8Free formatting
$8How Our Essay Writing Service Works
First, you will need to complete an order form. It's not difficult but, in case there is anything you find not to be clear, you may always call us so that we can guide you through it. On the order form, you will need to include some basic information concerning your order: subject, topic, number of pages, etc. We also encourage our clients to upload any relevant information or sources that will help.
Complete the order form
Once we have all the information and instructions that we need, we select the most suitable writer for your assignment. While everything seems to be clear, the writer, who has complete knowledge of the subject, may need clarification from you. It is at that point that you would receive a call or email from us.
Writer’s assignment
As soon as the writer has finished, it will be delivered both to the website and to your email address so that you will not miss it. If your deadline is close at hand, we will place a call to you to make sure that you receive the paper on time.
Completing the order and download