My family has always believed in the importance of recycling in order to reduce waste and conserve our natural resources. Growing up, both my sister and I assumed that most people shared these beliefs. However, when she moved in with her fiancé (now husband), she learned that he, generally, did not recycle. Incensed by this, my sister devised a plan to encourage him to participate in this environmentally friendly behavior. Knowing that he has a soft spot for animals, my sister began to look up pictures of animals swimming through trash-filled water or harmed by coming into contact with garbage (i.e. heads or fins stuck through plastic soda holders). She then told him how much of the trash causing the problems in these photos was recyclable and that many of these problems could be prevented. Appalled by this new knowledge, my brother-in-law began recycling and now recycles regularly. As my sister explained this method, I realized that, without even knowing it, she was using a form of cognitive dissonance to get him to change his behaviors.
Cognitive dissonance theory, as proposed by Leon Festinger in 1957, centers on the idea that people strive to maintain consistency across their opinions, attitudes, values, and knowledge, also known as their cognitions. When this consistency is not maintained and two cognitions are in conflict with one another, it is unpleasant. People attempt to reduce this unpleasantness by changing or devaluing one of the cognitions or adding a new cognition (Schneider, Gruman, & Coutts, 2012). This theory has been shown to be remarkably effective in getting people to adopt more environmentally sound practices. In one notable study, Dickerson, Thibodeau, Aronson, and Miller (1992) were able to encourage people to take significantly shorter showers, and thereby conserve water, by reminding them of past wasteful behavior and pairing this with a public commitment that implored others to take shorter showers. The pairing of the negative past behaviors with the public commitment aroused dissonance in the subjects of this study which, in turn, motivated them to use less water, themselves. In the case of my brother-in-law and his recycling behavior, my sister was utilizing a similar technique, though not exactly on purpose.
Without even realizing it, my sister was inducing dissonance in her husband. He views himself as an animal lover and cares greatly about all different types of creatures. By showing him pictures of animals harmed by a behavior in which he participates, my sister was creating conflicting cognitions within her husband. He cares about animals, but is participating in behaviors that harm them. In order to reduce this dissonance, my brother-in-law had to change one of his cognitions, in this case, his recycling behavior. By now recycling, his cognitions have regained consistency and the unpleasantness of the dissonance was reduced.
Seeing how effective cognitive dissonance can be in inducing desired behaviors, on both large and small scales, is fascinating. Dickerson et al.’s (1992) study is a great example of how inducing hypocrisy through cognitive dissonance in many people can be an effective mechanism in getting them to adopt environmentally friendly behaviors, while my sister’s use of animal pictures with her husband illustrates a simple cognitive dissonance technique that was similarly effective. Overall, it seems that exploiting this principle is an ideal method for changing behaviors and should continue to be explored as the adoption of eco-friendly behaviors takes on increasingly great importance.
References
Dickerson, C.A., Thibodeau, R., Aronson, E., & Miller, D. (1992). Using cognitive dissonance to encourage water conservation. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 22. 841-854.
Schneider, F. W., Gruman, J. A., & Coutts, L. M. (2012). Applied Social Psychology: Understand and Addressing Social and Practical Problems (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc.
Tags: applied social psycholgoy, behavior, Cognitive dissonance, environment, environment blog, psych 424, recycling
I found this to be very beneficial and an interesting study. Who knew that pictures of animals actually increased recycling. I compare this to those sad commercials about dogs and how they use music that gives you a sad feeling. They try to get you to donate money to dogs and it is like 10 cents a day. A lot of people have soft spots for animals and it is definitely a genius way to put pictures of animals in people’s faces and allow them to think how we are hurting these animals indirectly by throwing tons of trash out. Data shows how animals are being forced out of their habitats because of deforestation, fires, global warming and other things. We are the cause for that which is why we feel responsible for the deaths of the animals which triggers an emotional feeling. This was very interesting.
What an interesting post! I really enjoyed reading the examples of induced hypocrisy as an effective measure to impact positive change. When it comes to the environment and our resources I would say we are all a bit hypocritical. We say we love our environment but may not live the best lifestyle to show we love our environment. I think it would be safe to say we don’t want negative consequences such as global warming, catastrophic weather, and a depletion of resources however we don’t always necessarily live in such a manner that would support that feeling. I know for myself there is a lot I can do to impact change and this post highlights a very important aspect of this issue which is the lack of understanding. If we don’t see the big picture or have the understanding and education of some environmentalists, it is hard for us to paint the picture of how our waste is contributing to the environment in a negative way. This was the case with your brother in law who did not understand the impact his not recycling was having on animal life and through cognitive dissonance, he was able to see how his not recycling conflicted with his belief in the quality of life for animals. I think this would be a beneficial practice on a large scale to impact even more people to understand how our daily choices conflict with what we envision our planet to be. Sometimes, we need a hard reality check.
What a subtle (should I say devious) way to initiate a recycling habit in their home.
Knowing that there is a term “cognitive dissonance” that make this idea psychologically certified just adds to the total success of this idea.
Kudos to your sister, and to you for applying the theory to practice.