Encyclopedia of Sociology

COGNITIVE CONSISTENCY THEORIES

of attitude change to make the triad congruent is
that much less (by the exact amount denoted in the
quantitative calculation of all the relations of p, s,
and x). Osgood and Tannenbaum also argued that
strongly held attitudes would be less likely to be
modified in incongruent triads. This was support-
ed in subsequent research (Tannenbaum 1968).

AFFECTIVE-COGNITIVE CONSISTENCY

MODEL

This approach suggests that people seek consisten-
cy in order to satisfy a general motivation toward
simplicity in cognition, and/or to adhere to norms,
traditions, customs, or values that reinforce con-
sistency in one’s cognitions and behavior (Rosenberg
1956, 1968). Another interesting twist on the con-
sistency approach is that in the affective-cognitive
consistency model, Rosenberg (1956, 1968) pro-
posed that people are more motivated to maintain
cognitive consistency so that other people perceive
that they are consistent. In other words, while the
individual may occasionally feel some tension as a
result of inconsistency, other people find the in-
consistency more aversive, because it represents a
conflict for those around the individual. Specifical-
ly, if o has a positive attitude toward p, but p dislikes
x, which o likes, o is caught between being friendly
with, and avoiding, p. In this model, o feels tension
at this conflict, and must reduce the tension by
changing attitudes toward p (e.g., increasing at-
traction toward p, which would thereby outweigh
any conflict with p’s negative attitude toward x) or
toward x (e.g., o devalues x, so that p’s dislike of x
does not result in o feeling conflicted).

Rosenberg’s model also considers the rela-
tionship between the individual, his or her values,
and an attitude object. For example, consider that
p also has various other important values, denoted
as y1, y2, y3, etc. Rosenberg suggests that the p-x-y
triad is just as important in understanding cogni-
tive consistency as the traditional p-o-x triad. In the
affective-cognitive consistency approach, we must
consider p’s attitudes toward each of his or her
values, how p feels about x, and p’s perception of
the relationship between x and each of the values.
When all or most of the p-x-y triads are consistent,
the individual has achieved cognitive consistency.
When most or all of the p-x-y triads are incon-
sistent, the individual experiences cognitive
inconsistency.

The reason Rosenberg’s approach is called the

affective-cognitive consistency model is that it pro-

poses that inconsistency results when one’s feel-

ings are inconsistent with one’s beliefs. That is,

when the way we think and feel about an object or

person are at odds, we will modify one or both to

make the attitude consistent. Thus, this model

attempts to address consistency within one’s own

attitudes toward other people and objects, but also

consistency in how one’s value system relates to

other people and objects. The model is also unique

in suggesting that other people experience more

tension as a result of one’s own inconsistency.

Generally speaking, the model has been support-

ed by experiments (Rosenberg 1964), and is con-

sidered a very useful addition to the family of

cognitive consistency theories.

COGNITIVE DISSONANCE THEORY

Of all the cognitive consistency theories, none has

had more influence on researchers and subse-

quent theories than cognitive dissonance theory

(Festinger 1957). A conservative estimate suggests

that at least 1,000 articles have been published in

which researchers present data bearing upon the

theory and their own revisions of the theory (Coop-

er and Fazio 1984). Many agree with Jones’s (1976)

assessment that cognitive dissonance theory is ‘‘the

most important development in social psychology

to date’’ (p. x). Along the way, the theory has been

hailed for its elegant simplicity, and its powerful

range of utility (Collins 1992). It has also been

criticized for its lack of specificity (Lord 1992;

Schlenker 1992).

In formal terms, Festinger’s theory states that

two elements (behaviors or thoughts, or both)

‘‘...are in a dissonant relation if, considering these

two alone, the obverse of one element would

follow from the other’’ (1957, p. 13). Dissonance,

then, refers to a negative arousal brought about by

one’s inconsistent thoughts or actions, or both.

Essentially, this translates into the following as-

sumptions. If one has opposing thoughts or behav-

iors, or both, this brings about an aversive state of

tension, akin to a drive state like hunger or thirst.

This tension motivates the individual to seek relief

by eliminating the tension. The tension can be

dissipated by changing: 1) either a thought or

attitude to make it consonant with the opposing

thought or behavior, or 2) one’s behavior, to make