The Economic Consequences of Cognitive Dissonance
George A. Alerlof; William T. Dickens The American Economic Review,
Vol. 72, No. 3 (Jun. 1982), 307-319.
An Overview
The Basic Premises
Persons have preferences over states of the world.
Persons have preferences over their beliefs about the state of the
world.
Persons have some control over their beliefs.
Persons tend to select information that confirms their desired beliefs.
Persons tend to avoid information that conflicts with their desired
beliefs.
Beliefs once chosen, persist over time.
The Fundamental Model
Workers in dangerous jobs are oblivious to the dangers involved.
Benzene workers refused to believe the chemicals were dangerous.
Nuclear plant employees would leave their radiation detection
tags in their desks or at home.
Psychological Evidence for the Basic Premises
Persons are uncomfortable in maintaining two seemingly contradictory
ideas.
Most cognitive dissonance reactions stem from peoples views of themselves
as "smart, nice people." Information that conflicts with
this image tends to be ignored, rejected, or accommodated by changes
in other beliefs.
Persons who have made decisions tend to discard information that
would suggest such decisions are in error because the cognition that
the decision is in error is in conflict with the cognition that ego
is a smart person.
A Model
General Description of the Model
In the first period Workers have a choice between working in a hazardous
job or a safe job:
Workers will chose the job with the highest pecuniary and non-pecuniary
benefits. (Highest pay with no benefits).
Workers in the hazardous industry have to choice but to face
the possibility of an accident as there is no safety equipment
available.
If the cost imposed by future wrong decisions is not too great,
workers will, because of cognitive dissonance, come to believe
that the job is really safe.
In the second period, cost-effective safety equipment becomes available.
Because the workers believe the job is safe, they will not purchase
the safety equipment.
Safety legislation is needed to restore Pareto optimality since
workers have an incorrect assessment of the marginal rate of substitution
between safety equipment and money income.
Assumptions of the model
The labor market in the safe industry.
The demand for the product and the supply of the product in the
hazardous industry
The non-pecuniary disadvantages of work in the hazardous industry
The relation between fear and the perceived probability of accident
and the worker's choice.
Description of the Equilibrium of the Model
Illustration of the Equilibrium
The Equilibrium Discussed
Precommitment Contracts
Potential Applications
Sources of Innovation
Because of cognitive dissonance, beliefs are persistent once they
are adopted.
Persons tend to avoid or resist new information that contradicts
already established beliefs.
Therefore, innovators are previous outsiders to an activity. Paradigm
shifts are affected by those who are not formally reared and trained.
Advertising
Some advertising gives the consumer external justification for purchasing
a product.
People do have needs and tastes and they do buy products to satisfy
them.
People like to feel that they are attractive, socially adept, and
intelligent. It makes them feel good to hold such beliefs about themselves.
Ads facilitate such beliefs--if the person buys the advertised product.
When the value of the belief is less than the additional cost of
the advertised brand, advertising will fail.
Social Security
Social Security Legislation is based on the belief that persons
left to their own devices tend to purchase too little old age insurance.
If there are some persons who would simply prefer not to contemplate
a time when their earning power is diminished, and if the very fact
of saving for old age forces a person into such contemplation, there
is an argument for compulsory old age insurance. Persons may find
it uncomfortable to contemplate their old age. For that reason, they
may make the wrong tradeoff, given their own preferences, between
current consumption, and savings for retirement.
Economic Theory of Crime: If you increase the cost of something (committing
a crime), less will be consumed (crimes).
Its true that less obedience will be observed when there is greater
deterrence.
Once the threat of punishment is removed, people who have been threatened
with relatively severe punishment are more likely to disobey than
those threatened with relatively mild punishment.
Children who are punished severely for aggressive behavior at home
are more violent at school than those who are more mildly punished.
Those who obey rules for which the penalty of violation is relatively
small need to create an internal justification for their actions.
Most criminals act under the assumption that they will not get caught,
not by the severity of the punishment.
Self-motivation to obey the law is a key factor in crime reduction
and this may decrease with the severity of the punishment.
Crimes are motivated by perceived needs outweighing consequential
reality.
Conclusion
The approach in this paper suggests a good reason why non-informational
advertising is effective, why social security and safety legislation are
popular, and why persons fail to purchase actuarially beneficial flood
and earthquake insurance. The explanations do not rely on the assumption
that people are basically misinformed--if they believe something other
than the truth, they do so by their own choice.