Mistakes Were Made (but not by me)

When dealing believers of woo-woo, skeptics often ask themselves (and each other), "how can people believe that stuff?" and "why is it so hard to persuade these people they're wrong, when we have the facts right here?" For compelling answers to these questions, read this book.

Tavris and Aronson have written a very accessible introduction to cognitive dissonance, which is the tension that occurs when a person tries to hold two inconsistent "cognitions" (ideas, attitudes, beliefs, or opinions). Dissonance is an uncomfortable state, the more so when one of the cognitions is an important element of one's identity. The mind works to reduce dissonance, and it tends to do so in a way that preserves one's own concept of who one is.

The authors review the research and provide numerous real-world examples of how cognitive dissonance and self-justification can lead people into harmless self-delusions, and, usually one small step at a time, to incredible atrocities. They also describe how we can distort our memories, or create false memories, in the service of our self-justification, again with several examples.

The first three chapters provide the background on dissonance theory, blind spots, and our malleable memory. These are followed by chapters with examples of dissonance at work in science and medicine, the justice system, love and marriage, and disputes and wars. The final chapter contains suggestions for dealing with dissonance and admitting to our mistakes. All of the chapters contain copious endnotes with pointers to sources.

I was surprised to see how much scientific research there has been on dissonance theory. My view of psychology had been shaped by the pop-psych fads I've seen over the years, which always led me to believe that it was almost wholly non-scientific. It was refreshing to see I was wrong about that.

Overall, I found the book fascinating, if a bit disturbing at times. While it can be entertaining to read stories of others' self-deceptions, anyone with an ounce of introspection will probably see themselves in at least some of the examples. And some of the examples are downright scary, such as how police and district attorneys can ignore disconfirming evidence once they've decided on their prime suspect. My only quibble with the book is that the authors seemed to be picking on the Bush administration, and Republicans generally, a bit too frequently, giving the appearance of there being some political agenda in the book. But given that the references are to current events, fresh in the mind of anyone reading the book, I'll give them a pass on that.

I strongly recommend this book as a valuable addition to any skeptic's arsenal of tools for understanding and combatting irrational thinking.

Of course, I could be giving this book a positive review merely to justify to myself that the $25 I spent on it was worth it.