Unfortunately, it is rare that I feel the material I am learning in class relates directly to my everyday life at Dartmouth. But this summer, I and twenty two other '98s were lucky enough to take Psychology 1 in a small classroom in Silsby, with only one professor and no multiple choice tests. Somewhere in between discussing the progress of our professor's dog's training, and performing energy-aura experiments in class, we also talked about "cognitive dissonance theory."
Allow me for a moment to take you back in time to those hazy Psych 1 memories. Cognitive dissonance is defined as "the condition in which one has beliefs or attitudes that disagree with each other or with behavioral tendencies; when such cognitive dissonance arises the subject is motivated to reduce the dissonance through changes in cognition or behavior." Or, more simply -- internal confusion that leads to a changing of opinions. Now, you may be rightly demanding to know where exactly I saw this fancy psychological terminology fitting into my daily life.
Well, let's take a look at one of the experiments psychologists used to develop and refine this theory -- the "severity of initiation" experiment by Aronson and Mills in 1959. The experimenters were exploring the fact that when people have bad experiences in a group that they belong to, they tend to transform those bad experiences into positive ones, in order to reduce the cognitive dissonance.
The participants in this study were young, college-aged women who were asked to volunteer to participate in a discussion group. Before being admitted into the discussion group, some of the women had to take an "embarrassment test," which the women in the control group did not take. The participants were not aware that the test was essentially a "price" they were paying to get into the discussion.
All of the women were then told they would be allowed to join the group, and were invited to listen in on a discussion, which was rigged so that the participants heard a halting, dry, contradictory and mumbled conversation. After listening to the group talk, the women were asked to rate the discussion and the discussion participants.
What the experimenters had expected was indeed what they found when they examined the results; those women who had gone through the severe initiation were experiencing dissonant thoughts -- "I willingly went through a very embarrassing test to join this group," at the same time as "this group is dull and boring."
To reduce cognitive dissonance, the women had to alter one of these thoughts. Since they could not deny the high price they paid to join the group, they could only alter their group evaluation. The others did not experience this dissonance, and thus rated the discussion group much lower than the first group.
Hmmmm, why did this sound familiar? Could it be that there are initiation rituals on this campus that cause such cognitive dissonance to go on? What is it that is going on on campus this week that could be interpreted by some as a rite of "severe initiation?" Hmmmm, could it be that rush is an elaborate psychological ritual meant to be analyzed by silly Psych 1 students like me?
Before I go on here, I feel the need to write a disclaimer of sorts. Some people would like to hear me conclude my whole argument by saying that the entire Greek system is a psychologically manipulative institution that turns out little messed up, dissonant creatures -- well, sorry to disappoint you. I don't think so.
Let's assume that for most people, even though rush may not be the highlight of their sophomore year, their eventual positive experiences in their chosen house will compensate for it many times over. However, what I would like to draw your attention to, my fellow Dartmouth students, whether you be affiliated or unaffiliated, and particularly those of you going through rush this week and next -- is the possibility that for some people, cognitive dissonance may be happening behind the smiling faces and shaking hands.
What about that student who joined a house, and is not necessarily enjoying the experience? If he or she does not feel the brotherhood or sisterhood he or she set out to achieve, why doesn't the student just break the ties and leave? Why have I heard so many juniors and seniors complain about their houses constantly, yet so few of them in fact depledged and went to seek their fortune (and social life) elsewhere?
This is where cognitive dissonance theory enlightened me -- as soon as we make any decision in our everyday lives, we often experience dissonance -- suddenly we see all the unattractive things about it weighted against all the attractive things about the option we did not take. And as with the women who joined the discussion group, we do not want to admit that we might have gone and done something we are not entirely happy with -- so we convince ourselves that it is great and that we really do love it.
I am not sure where all this "psycho-babble" leaves me, or you, for that matter. At the very least, I think I gained an insight into why certain processes cannot be changed without a revamp of the entire system.
I leave this issue understanding that most people are not manipulating their minds into thinking they are happy with their choice of joining a house -- they really are, scouts honor, happy. But I hope that those people who are not happy, who feel like they must justify their own sacrifice to themselves by staying where they are, will read this.
And I hope they have the same realizations I did that sunny July day in class -- sometimes we really should stop trying to rationalize what we did in the past and take some rational steps in the present instead.
