Cognitive Dissonance Theory

Cognitive Dissonance is a psychological discomfort caused by inconsistency among a person's belief, attitudes, and or actions. There are three hypotheses that explain the theory. The first hypothesis is selective exposure which is the tendency to avoid information inconsistent with one's belief and attitudes. One only accepts information that is consistent with their own thoughts. Hypothesis two is post-decision dissonance; which are close call decisions and can affect a decision one makes. And the third hypothesis is minimal justification, which is a counter attitudinal action, freely chosen with little incentive or justification, leading to a change in attitude (Craig, R., 1998, http://www.colorado.edu/communication/meta-discourses/Theory/dissonance/).
First, in its simplest form, dissonance increases as the degree of discrepancy among cognitions increases. Second, dissonance increases as the number of discrepant cognitions increases. Third, dissonance is inversely proportional to the number of consonant cognitions held by an individual. Fourth, the relative weights given to the consonant and dissonant cognitions may be adjusted by their importance in the mind of the individual. If dissonance is experienced as an unpleasant drive state, the individual is motivated to reduce it. Now that the factors that affect the magnitude of this unpleasantness have been identified, it should be possible to predict what we can do to reduce it. If dissonance is experienced as an unpleasant drive state, the individual is motivated to reduce it. Now that the factors that affect the magnitude of this unpleasantness have been identified, it should be possible to predict what we can do to reduce it (Rudolph, F., http://www.ithaca.edu/faculty/stephens/cdback.html). Cognitive Dissonance Theory is applicable in many life situations. As long as the dissonance is strong enough to cause a threat to the status quo attitude, the tension of cognitive dissonance must be alleviated, and we do this by changing our behavior or our beliefs (Jean, E., 1999.
First, the dissonance occurred in me at two different points in the process. The disturbing mental state first appeared when I was in the relationship and I saw an important quality he lacked which was important to me. It was no need to control me because I was younger. Because this inconsistency was important to me, it threatened me enough to where my wanting to change to avoid the conflict was almost automatic. I liked him considerably and enjoyed the relationship in the beginning. So what I did about this unreasonable situation was engage in the process of reducing dissonance. I chose to reduce the importance I placed on intellectual ability by thinking he had so many other great qualities to make up for it. This example of selective exposure decreased my dissonance for some time; my need to be consistent was being met. Looking back at it, I realized I needed to undergo this change in attitude in order to feel like I didn't have multiple personalities evident by feeling one way and doing something to oppose it. Even though I actually was opposing an important attitude of mine, I did not see it because in the process of reducing the inconsistency, I had cleverly altered my attitude when I was in the reducing dissonance mode. We still talk occasionally and will remain