Cognitive Dissonance Theory in Coaching

The Framework

We begin our anniversary series for The Infourge Compendium of Models and Theories by exploring a framework I use with clients struggling through competing commitments/values, polarities, and internal conflict. Cognitive Dissonance Theory provides a great framework for understanding how an imbalance between our actions and beliefs can create internal conflict leading to anxiety and somatic distress.

Developed in the 1950s by psychologist Leon Festinger, Cognitive Dissonance Theory (CDT) falls under the umbrella of Consistency Theories, a collection of theories that suggest humans strive for a balance between cognition (what we think) and behavior (how we act).

The theory defines cognitive dissonance as a feeling of mental discomfort resulting from conflict between a person’s beliefs, values, attitudes, and behaviors. This imbalance can lead to real emotional and physical (somatic) discomfort. When this occurs, a person’s natural response is to resolve the dissonance in the simplest way possible. 

Some of the more common sources of cognitive dissonance include:

Forced compliance: This form of dissonance occurs when an external source compels a person to do something that violates their values or beliefs. Dissonance may manifest immediately or long after the action is complete. An example of forced compliance is peer pressure.

Decision-making: This happens when a person faces a decision in which all available choices are undesirable. The expression “damned if you do, damned if you don’t” exemplifies this scenario. A client compelled to choose from undesirable choices (i.e., the lesser of two evils) may experience dissonance as a result.

Effort: This occurs when a person dedicates a lot of time to accomplishing something and the results fail to meet expectations. A person who invests a lot of time and effort to a task may resist or resent a negative outcome resulting in dissonance. An expression which can precipitate this is “practice makes perfect.”

New information: This happens when a person learns new information that suggests their behavior, long assumed correct, is wrong. For example, a senior employee may experience dissonance when presented with a newer and more effective way of performing tasks at work.

When confronted with dissonance, CDT suggests an individual will inherently try to reestablish balance. The most common approaches people use to achieve balance include:

Justification: Seek out any information that justifies the original behavior, no matter how illogical or unsound.

Confirmation bias: Avoid or reject any information that does not align with the original behavior.

Value reduction: Reduce the importance of the conflicting value.

Reconciliation: This involves the person changing their behaviors to align with their beliefs. This is the ideal solution, but also the most difficult. 

When exploring cognitive dissonance, it is important to understand the source of the dissonance to determine how the client intends to resolve the conflict. Because it is natural to seek the easiest path to resolution, the client’s ensuing actions may lead to undesirable consequences.

Modern researchers are now calling into question the validity of CDT, after nearly fifty years as a prominent theory in social psychology. However, CDT remains a widely accepted theory used across professions including coaching.

Professionals seeking additional information may consider Festinger’s 1957 book, A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance. 

Sources[i]

How I Use the Framework

Cognitive Dissonance Theory is one of those frameworks I use often because so many of us experience internal conflict, especially when torn between competing obligations. A few years ago, I was coaching a senior government leader who described feeling a great deal of anxiety within himself while at work. He could not understand why or pinpoint the source though it seemed to center on his decisions as the head of his department. Over time I noticed a pattern in his story. As he discussed the choices he faced, he would occasionally use expressions like lesser of two evils, screwed no matter what, and it is what it is. Additionally, I also observed his tendency to rationalize his decisions and minimize his role in his own decisions.

Based on my observations, I wondered if my client might be experiencing a form of cognitive dissonance, specifically stemming from decisions whose courses of action conflicted with his values, sense of right, or other deeply held belief. I decided to try an indirect approach by running my client through an exercise designed to help him identify his values while also distinguishing his actual values from his aspirational values. We explored the relationship between his identified values and his organization’s values, between his values and his leadership style, and finally between his values and his decision-making process. Through the course of our discussion, he discovered that the source of his anxiety was the result of limitations on his decision-making imposed by his leaders. This restricted his ability to access a diverse array of options, limiting him to choices that did not always align with his value system.

We spent the better part of six months examining this dissonance, exploring options, and developing mechanisms to help him adapt. This included recognizing, acknowledging, and owning his values and holding himself accountable to speak truth to power about the constraints placed on him when making decisions. Through this experience, he was able to articulate and request what he needed to allow him to make the ethically correct decisions he needed. 

This example demonstrates an implicit use of Cognitive Dissonance Theory in practice. Put another way, this theory served as a framework of knowledge that informed my coaching actions and approaches with the client. This is but one way, “right looks a lot of different ways.” What works best will depend on your skills, the client’s needs, and the situation.

Cognitive Dissonance Theory is one of over 300 frameworks across 26 different categories included in the Infourge Compendium of Models and Theories. Next week, we will explore the 4A Model for Stress Management, a great framework for clients struggling with overwhelming obligations.

[i] Cognitive Dissonance Theory

McLeod, S. (2023, October 24). What is cognitive dissonance theory? Retrieved from Simply Psychology: https://www.simplypsychology.org/cognitive-dissonance.html

Cherry, K. (2022, November 7). What is cognitive dissonance? Retrieved from Verywell Mind: https://www.verywellmind.com/what-is-cognitive-dissonance-2795012

Vaidis, D., & Bran, A. (2019, May 29). Respectable challenges to respectable theory: Cognitive dissonance theory requires conceptualization clarification and tools. Frontiers in Psychology 10: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01189/full

Harmon-Jones, E., Mills, J. (2019). An introduction to cognitive dissonance theory and an overview of current perspectives on the theory.Retrieved from the American Psychological Association: https://www.apa.org/pubs/books/Cognitive-Dissonance-Intro-Sample.pdf

Villines, Z. (2023, May 23). Cognitive dissonance: What to know. Retrieved from Medical News Today: https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/326738#how-to-resolve

Cognitive dissonance. (n.d.). Retrieved from Psychology Today: https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/basics/cognitive-dissonance

Cognitive dissonance (Festinger). (n.d.). Retrieved from Instructional Design: https://www.instructionaldesign.org/theories/cognitive-dissonance/

Suls, J. (n.d.). Cognitive dissonance of Leon Festinger. Retrieved from Britannica: https://www.britannica.com/biography/Leon-Festinger/Cognitive-dissonance