Cognitive dissonance and ASR

[Thomas Savage]

ASR can act as a powerful catalyst for cognitive dissonance, amplifying the inherent tension between our beliefs and behaviors clashing as they do with new members coming from a ideology that's often opposite to our own as well as being as deeply ingrained to them as is our own .

From curated online personas to echo chambers and anonymous interactions ASR can at times offer a near unique set of challenges both to our established members and those new to the forum. Maintaining a healthy constructive atmosphere can be very challenging. One can feel a certain type of existential threat and react in ways that unfortunately do nothing for our own enjoyment or indeed the forum as a whole.

Understanding the dynamics of cognitive dissonance in behaviors at ASR is in my view vital for fostering responsible forum citizenship, promoting critical thinking, and mitigating the negative impacts that disturb our peace and that of some new members , resulting in very familiar patterns of disruption out in the threads . In the end we are often all suffering from the same cognitive distress, clearly they are wrong and we are right so let's not forget that ha ha . ..

We are only human after all , understanding our own vulnerabilities and false often being a strong contributing factor to what made us look at audio in the way we do here . We literally can't trust ourselves and require listening controls and regular probing, who dosnt like a good probe ...

It's with this in mind, we all walk the tightrope at times between looking after our peace of mind , our cognitive singularity if you will and the often difficult task of confronting new members who themselves are in a certain state of distress trying to get to grips with the fact everything they thought was right and good might infact not be . We also have the added challenge of differing national cultures and language.

A big thank you to all of you that try so hard and help keep ASR as welcoming as possible .

 

[bigguyca]

ASR can act as a powerful catalyst for cognitive dissonance, amplifying the inherent tension between our beliefs and behaviors clashing as they do with new members coming from a ideology that's often opposite to our own as well as being as deeply ingrained to them as is our own .

From curated online personas to echo chambers and anonymous interactions ASR can at times offer a near unique set of challenges both to our established members and those new to the forum. Maintaining a healthy constructive atmosphere can be very challenging. One can feel a certain type of existential threat and react in ways that unfortunately do nothing for our own enjoyment or indeed the forum as a whole.

Understanding the dynamics of cognitive dissonance in behaviors at ASR is in my view vital for fostering responsible forum citizenship, promoting critical thinking, and mitigating the negative impacts that disturb our peace and that of some new members , resulting in very familiar patterns of disruption out in the threads . In the end we are often all suffering from the same cognitive distress, clearly they are wrong and we are right so let's not forget that ha ha . ..

We are only human after all , understanding our own vulnerabilities and false often being a strong contributing factor to what made us look at audio in the way we do here . We literally can't trust ourselves and require listening controls and regular probing, who dosnt like a good probe ...

It's with this in mind, we all walk the tightrope at times between looking after our peace of mind , our cognitive singularity if you will and the often difficult task of confronting new members who themselves are in a certain state of distress trying to get to grips with the fact everything they thought was right and good might infact not be . We also have the added challenge of differing national cultures and language.

A big thank you to all of you that try so hard and help keep ASR as welcoming as possible .

I really, really hate to upset you, but it seems you have incorrectly defined and used the term cognitive dissonance.

Using an AI search since your post seemed incorrect and I know little about the subject, gives the following description of cognitive dissonance which is clearly at odds with your usage of the term in your post. Cognitive dissonance seems to be discomfort from internal conflicts within ones self, not conflict with others.

"Cognitive dissonance is a feeling of discomfort that occurs when a person's beliefs, values, or actions don't align. It can also happen when someone holds two or more conflicting beliefs." From Google.

 

[Thomas Savage]

I really, really hate to upset you, but it seems you have incorrectly defined and used the term cognitive dissonance.

Using an AI search since your post seemed incorrect and I know little about the subject, gives the following description of cognitive dissonance which is clearly at odds with your usage of the term in your post. Cognitive dissonance seems to be discomfort from internal conflicts within ones self, not conflict with others.

"Cognitive dissonance is a feeling of discomfort that occurs when a person's beliefs, values, or actions don't align. It can also happen when someone holds two or more conflicting beliefs." From Google.

Not upset at all, you disagree quite fundamentally with me. I in turn internalise you're veiw point that's polar opposite to mine and in doing so a conflict is created within me creating a urge to eradicate such conflict and get back to a state of cognitive calm and peace, the singularity if you will . So here I am replying to you , quite irrationally one could argue .

Here, you've disagreed with me strongly enough to have chosen to not only reply but look it up through a AI .. , the motivations for which and underlying cause of are in my view a state of cognitive dissonance within oneself . Alas you already worried you'd upset me , a stranger to you and apologised in advance , thanks that was kind but ever wondered why. Being polite and/or trying to avoid a strong reaction , a reaction from a internal cognitive conflict .

Our internal conflicts influence our external behaviours, how else dose one digest a conflicting opinion or ideology if not to run it through our internal processor itself influenced by a mirriad of norms and learnt ' rules ' , the results of which can under the right conditions create a cognitive disharmony if you will when challenged.

But you are free to ' upset me ' and disagree.

 

[JSmith]

Does one need to be cognitive to have dissonance?

I think, therefore I am... all is well then, whew.


JSmith

 

[Rednaxela]

This honestly doesn't happen very often but the opening post is too difficult for me to follow.

 

[Pareto Pragmatic]

Using an AI search since your post seemed incorrect and I know little about the subject, gives the following description of cognitive dissonance which is clearly at odds with your usage of the term in your post. Cognitive dissonance seems to be discomfort from internal conflicts within ones self, not conflict with others.

"Cognitive dissonance is a feeling of discomfort that occurs when a person's beliefs, values, or actions don't align. It can also happen when someone holds two or more conflicting beliefs." From Google.

Usually this conflict happens via social interaction, at least in experimental testing. The classic test: have a subject do something boring, then they tell the "next subject" that it was interesting.... and that leads to them judging the task as less boring than those who don't tell someone else it is not boring. The cognitive dissonance happens when their own actions create the conflict, the resolution is from the changing task judgement by those in the treatment group.

It's the resolution of the dissonance that is the focus of most research I have seen on this topic. Dissonance is discomforting, how is that discomfort dealt with?

So if we wanted to do that here, someone who is very "measurement is everything" would need to publicly declare that measurements miss something very important, then we would have to see if their actual attitudes shift from such a false declaration.

However, that is not required. What is required is that someone see a piece of information that goes against their beliefs, and not dismiss it out of hand in a reflexive manner (since that would prevent dissonance.) That dissonance will be resolved. Usually by constructing a chain of argument that dismisses the new information. That chain of argument is an action to bring things back into equilibrium. In rare cases the dissonance is resolved by changing one's opinion. The beliefs, values, or actions change.

So I take your point, but technically although your definition is correct, it ignores the process that I think the OP is focused on.

That said, I don't think most of what is going on involves cognitive dissonance, since most people seem to reflexively reject disconfirming ideas and evidence. Cognitive dissonance needs to time to ferment to have an effect and make people feel a bit off, and immediate rejection means no time for that effect to kick in. In fact, we might look at such reflexive rejection as a way to avoid the discomfort of cognitive dissonance.

 

[Matias]

Boss said so too before.

Let's be a little nicer, especially to newcomers

Hello you all. While I consider our forum to be more friendly than many, it seems that we are quite harsh on new members who post things that go against our consensus view. There is no reason to pound on people hard when they say this and that sounds good to them. Let them have some time here...

www.audiosciencereview.com

 

[Pareto Pragmatic]

Here, you've disagreed with me strongly enough to have chosen to not only reply but look it up through a AI .. , the motivations for which and underlying cause of are in my view a state of cognitive dissonance within oneself . Alas you already worried you'd upset me , a stranger to you and apologised in advance , thanks that was kind but ever wondered why. Being polite and/or trying to avoid a strong reaction , a reaction from a internal cognitive conflict .

Alternative explanation. People are more cautious when dealing with those who have power over them, and the OP is a moderator who has power here.

Alt 2: bigguyca is a very polite person.

So, there's two other explanations. Are you experiencing cognitive dissonance right now? If so, how will you resolve it? By defending your original idea, or by some other method?

BTW, while I see some usefulness to applying cognitive dissonance to online discussions, I think confirmation bias (for example) is a far more useful concept for explaining what we see.

 

[Thomas Savage]

Alternative explanation. People are more cautious when dealing with those who have power over them, and the OP is a moderator who has power here.

Yes precisely, the reasons for which are part of our culture and accepted social norms resulting in being polite or showing caution. To go against that ...

I think confirmation bias (for example) is a far more useful concept for explaining what we see.

Definitely! And why dose one suppose we have this confirmation bias ? What problem is our mind trying to solve , could it be a reaction to thr mind dealing with cognitive dissonance.

 

[pkane]

BTW, while I see some usefulness to applying cognitive dissonance to online discussions, I think confirmation bias (for example) is a far more useful concept for explaining what we see.

I suspect both are right. Confirmation bias is the cause and cognitive dissonance is the reaction. We all experience both, although how we deal with cognitive dissonance is different for each of us.

 

[whereisbrian]

i'm almost a newbie and it's a real pleasure to be there with clever members.

Keep that in mind: in some french forum, telling an "objectivist" point of view is the easy way to be banned without any serious reason.

 

[Newman]

[to TS] I really, really hate to upset you, but it seems you have incorrectly defined and used the term cognitive dissonance.

Using an AI search since your post seemed incorrect and I know little about the subject, gives the following description of cognitive dissonance which is clearly at odds with your usage of the term in your post. Cognitive dissonance seems to be discomfort from internal conflicts within ones self, not conflict with others.

"Cognitive dissonance is a feeling of discomfort that occurs when a person's beliefs, values, or actions don't align. It can also happen when someone holds two or more conflicting beliefs." From Google.

Not upset at all, you disagree quite fundamentally with me. I in turn internalise you're veiw point that's polar opposite to mine and in doing so a conflict is created within me creating a urge to eradicate such conflict and get back to a state of cognitive calm and peace, the singularity if you will . So here I am replying to you , quite irrationally one could argue .

Here, you've disagreed with me strongly enough to have chosen to not only reply but look it up through a AI .. , the motivations for which and underlying cause of are in my view a state of cognitive dissonance within oneself . Alas you already worried you'd upset me , a stranger to you and apologised in advance , thanks that was kind but ever wondered why. Being polite and/or trying to avoid a strong reaction , a reaction from a internal cognitive conflict .

Our internal conflicts influence our external behaviours, how else dose one digest a conflicting opinion or ideology if not to run it through our internal processor itself influenced by a mirriad of norms and learnt ' rules ' , the results of which can under the right conditions create a cognitive disharmony if you will when challenged.

But you are free to ' upset me ' and disagree.

No I think bigguy is right, the wording in your OP suggests you don't understand the term cognitive dissonance, and also you seem to think the term cognitive distress has a meaning that I am not aware of.

If the intention of the OP is a moderator giving the membership some kind of guidance for posting, I have to say that I don't know what you are trying to say. And if I don't know, then probably a number of others are also unenlightened, even if some members think it is clear.

Can you please back down from the fancy talk, and give us something straight. What is your message in much plainer, much shorter English?

cheers

 

[Petevid]

Excluding the trolls who post I wonder if new members who post here, who have ideologies that oppose ASR's, do so because in fact they may either subconsciously or consciously be starting to doubt their own ideology. If so treating them with some kindness and patience would be the best response, no matter how infuriating it may get.

 

[pkane]

Can you please back down from the fancy talk, and give us something straight. What is your message in much plainer, much shorter English?

I'm worried about our survival as a species when the (un)intelligent AI understands us better than we do ourselves

The message explains that when new members with different beliefs join ASR, it creates tension and conflict. This is because people feel their views are right, which leads to frustration. Understanding these conflicts and being aware of our own biases is important for keeping the forum welcoming and productive. It also acknowledges the challenges of language and cultural differences. Finally, it thanks those who help maintain a positive environment on ASR.

 

[Newman]

I don't read AI answers, sorry.

 

[pkane]

I don't read AI answers, sorry.

That will be remembered once our AI overlords take over.

 

[Multicore]

ASR can act as a powerful catalyst for cognitive dissonance, amplifying the inherent tension between our beliefs and behaviors clashing as they do with new members coming from a ideology that's often opposite to our own as well as being as deeply ingrained to them as is our own .

Are you referring to what I would call tribalism? the tendency to think in terms of us vs. them, and consequently to identify newcomers are friend or enemies? If so then yes, I don't think that often advances our cause very well, at least as far as I understand our cause.

 

[ads_cft222]

I would also add the terms "institutionalization," "groupthink," or "echo chamber" to help explain some recurring interactions. Ideally, before any discussion or argument takes place, all parties should agree on the axioms (the underlying facts) before seeking or evaluating a proof for a statement. I believe the last part is difficult to happen...

 

[Mart68]

There's an ideology now?

Pretty simple for me - if you're going to make unlikely/improbable/seemingly impossible claims, show me some supporting evidence and I'll look at it (or the smarter, better educated than me people on ASR will look at it).

If you can't do that then shut up and go away.

Not an ideology, not by any stretch.

 

[Thomas Savage]

No I think bigguy is right, the wording in your OP suggests you don't understand the term cognitive dissonance, and also you seem to think the term cognitive distress has a meaning that I am not aware of.

If the intention of the OP is a moderator giving the membership some kind of guidance for posting, I have to say that I don't know what you are trying to say. And if I don't know, then probably a number of others are also unenlightened, even if some members think it is clear.

Can you please back down from the fancy talk, and give us something straight. What is your message in much plainer, much shorter English?

cheers

Not really, more to talk about how we experience online social media based discussions and to recognise it can be difficult at times, really challenge our values in various ways . Then to thank folks for absorbing the challenges as its hard some times.

It's down here in the this section of the forum and it's just me exploring a subject out of intrest. Maybe I will move it somewhere or delete it .