There is something about a human being nature that wants to know what is going around him and we are constantly making decisions based on that acquired knowledge. Sometimes we are proud and defensive of the decisions we make and other times we regret our choices. Cognitive dissonance theory addresses the idea of, “one’s self-image is inconsistent with one’s beliefs, attitudes, or behaviors” (Gass & Seiter, 2013, p. 63). It goes on explaining about why we might do things that do not match our ideology on life or a certain issues and how “persuasive messages can be tailored to either increase or decrease in dissonance” (Gass & Seiter, 2013, p. 64).
Application and Analysis
Labeling GMO’s has been a very popular issue lately with multiple states trying to pass laws against it and it is one of the many examples of cognitive dissonance. Is it beneficial for the humans to grow bigger and more productive crops or has it raised concerns over the health of people exposed to GMO crops? Many believe they need to know the truth regarding this issue to make the right decisions. The question is were there any persuasive messages targeted towards the voters to vote one way or the other that have helped to make the final outcome on Prop 37 here in California back in 2012 (Pesticide Companies Contribute Another $5.5 Million to Kill GMO Labeling Initiative, 2012).
Proposition 37 on GMO labeling shows cognitive dissonance through the persuasive attempt to buy people’s votes and move them to their side of the issue. Some people might have believed that they are very healthy and they do not need the label on their food because they try to avoid GMO by shopping in stores that avoid having it in their stores and thus votes against Prop 37, when in reality they have wished to know for sure. After the decision such people might make excuses such as being educated and able to read the label to distinguish GMO products from non-GMO and reinforcing their decision in defending themselves. Most people...