Cognitive Dissonance – one of the most established and respected theories in psychology – is under attack. An economist – M. Keith Chen – uses what is called the “Monty Hall problem” to show that the research on cognitive dissonance may be seriously flawed. In this episode I explain Chen’s concerns about the research on and then I propose that a new study which uses neurofeedback to study cognitive dissonance may come to the rescue at just the right moment. Join me to find out how.
Here is the table from M. Keith Chen’s article, “Rationalization and Cognitive Dissonance: Do Choices Affect or Reflect Preferences?” that shows why, once a Monkey has chosen one letter over another (in this case letter A – which could be a red M&M – over letter B, the blue M&M), letter C is likely to be chosen.
Resources on Cognitive Dissonance
- The original article on Cognitive Dissonance which used the “free choice paradigm” was Brehm, J. W. (1956) Postdecision changes in the desirability of alternatives, Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 52, 384-9
- The article Monty Hall Meets Cognitive Dissonance By John Tierney appeared in the Science section of the NYT on April 7, 2008.
- Go Ahead, Rationalize. Monkeys Do It, Too.
- And Behind Door No. 1, a Fatal Flaw – article appeared in the NYT on April 8, 2008
- Behind Monty Hall’s Doors: Puzzle, Debate and Answer?
- The online version of the game of the “Three Door” or “Monty Hall” problem can be found here.
- The research article I discussed in which subjects went through the free choice approach and then underwent biofeedback to reduce activity in the left frontal cortex is called,
- Left Frontal Cortical Activation and Spreading of Alternatives: Tests of the Action-Based Model of Dissonance by Eddie Harmon-Jones and Cindy Harmon-Jones (Texas A&M University), Meghan Fearn, Jonathan D. Sigelman, and Peter Johnson (University of Wisconsin–Madison). Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2008, Vol. 94, No. 1, 1–15