Methods of Persuasion: How to Use Psychology to Influence Human Behavior by Nick Kolenda

were given either $1 or $20 to convince new participants that the experiment was “fun and exciting.” Do you think that your actual attitude toward the experiment would change depending on the reward? If so, in which direction would your attitude change?
    In the actual study, people’s genuine attitude toward that experiment became significantly more favorable when they were paid $1 (compared to $20) to convince another participant that the experiment was fun (Festinger & Carlsmith, 1959). But how could that be? Common sense suggests that a larger reward should produce a larger attitude change. Why did $1 produce a more favorable attitude toward the experiment compared to $20? This chapter will explain the interesting principle behind that surprising result and how you can use it to persuade other people.
    THE POWER OF (IN)CONSISTENCY
    Let’s take a moment to travel back in time. In 1954, a rising cult group predicted that a massive flood would occur on December 21 and that it would destroy the entire planet. Fortunately, the leader of the cult claimed that a being from the planet Clarion informed her that a flying saucer would rescue members of her cult on the night before the flood. Phew.
    When December 21 came and went without any flood, what do you think happened to members of that cult? Most people today would assume that, once cult members realized that their prediction was wrong, they would probably admit that their belief about the end of the world was also wrong. But is that what they did? Nope. In fact, they did the opposite. When faced with the earth-shattering reality that the flood didn’t occur as predicted, the leader of the cult merely changed the date of the flood’s arrival, and members actually became more committed to the cult. Astonishingly, their beliefs about the flood became even stronger .
    Unbeknownst to members of the cult who were waiting for the flying saucer to arrive, Leon Festinger, a prominent researcher in social psychology, infiltrated the group with his colleagues. They pretended to be followers of the cult so that they could observe their behavior (pretty dedicated researchers, huh?). Upon witnessing cult members develop stronger beliefs about the end of the world after the flood failed to arrive, Festinger developed an important conclusion: people have a powerful psychological need to maintain consistent attitudes and behavior.
    That conclusion can help explain why body language can trigger congruent attitudes. If we display certain body language (e.g., head nodding), and if that body language is inconsistent with our inner attitude (e.g., we’re in disagreement), we feel a state of discomfort known as cognitive dissonance , and we become motivated to resolve that discomfort. How do we resolve it? We often resolve that dissonance by changing our attitude so that it matches our behavior (e.g., we change our attitude from disagreement to agreement to match our body language of nodding our head).
    This chapter expands that knowledge by explaining how that principle occurs not just with body language, but also with behavior. If you start to observe your own daily actions, you’ll soon notice that we’re influenced by cognitive dissonance nearly every day. Whenever we perform an action that’s inconsistent with one of our attitudes, we feel discomfort and we become motivated to resolve that discomfort in some way:
     
You just started a new diet, yet you’re eating a piece of cake. You might justify your inconsistent behavior by reminding yourself that it’s your friend’s birthday and that it would be “rude” if you didn’t eat the cake.
You believe that people shouldn’t steal, yet you illegally download music. You might justify your inconsistent behavior by claiming that “everyone else is doing it.”
You consider yourself a studious college student, yet you’re choosing to hang out with friends rather than study for an exam. You might justify your inconsistent behavior