158THE SOCIAL-PSYCHOLOGICAL APPROACHcommunication and interpersonal communication. Mass communicationoften depends on interpersonal communication to extend its reach,and research on adoption of innovations has shown that people atcertain stages of the adoption process are more dependent on inter-+personal communication than on mass communication. The relation-ship between mass communication and interpersonal communication isexplored in Chapter 11.chapter8Cognitive Consistency andMass CommunicationThe general notion of consistency underlies all of science. It is the notion thatphenomena are ordered (or consistent) that allows predictability. Predictability,in turn, allows the scientist to formulate and test hypotheses, make generaliza-tions from them, build theory, and predict future outcomes. The purpose of thecommunication researcher and theorist is, to a great measure, to predict theeffect or future outcomes of messages.The concept of consistency in human behavior is an extension of the generalnotion from the physical world to the area of human behavior. Various theoristscontend that humans strive for consistency in a number of ways—betweenattitudes, between behaviors, between attitudes and behaviors, in our perceptionof the world, and even in the development of personality. In short, we try toorganize our world in ways that seem to us to be meaningful and sensible.The concepts of human consistency are based on the notion that humanbeings act in rational ways. However, we also use rationalization—the attemptto explain irrational behavior in a rational or consistent way. Rationalizationemphasizes that in our desire to appear rational or consistent to ourselves weoften employ means that may seem irrational or inconsistent to others.The notions of consistency assume that inconsistency generates “psycho-logical tension” or discomfort within human beings, which results in internal pres-sure to eliminate or reduce the inconsistency and, if possible, achieve consistency.Examples of the consistency principles in everyday affairs are widespread.A first-ranked football team in an area where football reigns supreme suffereda humiliating defeat at the hands of a long-standing rival. The following dayboth the media and individual conversations were filled with rationalizationsand justifications.160THE SOCIAL-PSYCHOLOGICAL APPROACHAs noted, consistency theories recognize human attempts at rationality, butin achieving it we often display striking irrationality. The concept of rationaliza-tion assumes both rationality and irrationality—we often use irrational means toachieve understanding, to justify painful experiences, or to make the world fitour “frame of reference .“Mass communication research is concerned, in part, with how individuals1deal with discrepant or inconsistent information, which is often presented withthe purpose of bringing about attitude change. This attitude change is one ofthe many ways in which we can reduce or eliminate the discomfort or psycho-logical pressure of inconsistency.JAlthough a number of consistency theories are of interest to behavioralscientists (Kiesler, Collins, & Miller, 1969; Abelson et al., 1968), for the purposesof this book only four major ones will be discussed.HEIDERS BAL4NCE THEORYMost writers usually credit Fritz Heider (1946) with the earliest articulation ofa consistency theory, although the informal concept can be traced back to earlierwork (see Kiesler et al., 1969, p. 157). As a psychologist, Heider was concernedwith the way an individual organizes attitudes toward people and objects inrelation to one another within that individual’s own cognitive structure. Heiderpostulated that unbalanced states produce tension and generate forces to restorebalance. He says that “the concept of a balanced state designates a situation inwhich the perceived units and the experienced sentiments co-exist withoutstress” (1958, p. 176).Heider’s paradigm focused on two individuals, a person (P), the object ofthe analysis, some other person (0), and a physical object, idea, or event (X).Heider’s concern was with how relationships among these three entities areorganized in the mind of one individual (P). Heider distinguished two types ofrelationships among these three entities, liking (L) and unit (u) relations (cause,possession, similarity, etc.). In Heider’s paradigm, “a balanced state exists if allthree relations are positive in all respects or if two are negative and one ispositive” (1946, p. 110). All other combinations are unbalanced.In Heider’s conception, degrees of liking cannot be represented; a relationis either positive or negative (Figure 8.1). It is assumed that a balanced state isstable and resists outside influences. An unbalanced state is assumed to beunstable and is assumed to produce psychological tension within an individual.This tension “becomes relieved only when change within the situation takes Placein such a way that a state of balance is achieved” (Heider, 1958, p. 180). Thispinpoints the communicator’s interest in the theory for it implies a model ofattitude change and resistance to attitude change, Unbalanced states, beingunstable states, are susceptible to change toward baIance. Balanced states, being .stable states, resist chang~. Data suppor&g Heider’s balance theory are discussedin Zajonc (196o), Kiesler et al. (1969), and Abelson et al. (1968).#8 / COGNITIVE CONSISTENCY AND MASS COMMUNICATION161PPPPA/(,,x p,,, ///,/Jo~xo~o~xO.–-––*XP PPPA A /’”\ /“”+o--——+xo––——+xo~xo-—--—+xBalanced StatesUnbalanced StatesFIGURE 8.1 Examples of balanced and unbalanced states according toHeider’s definition of balance. Solid lines represent positive, and brokenlines negative relations.SOURCE: From R. B. Zajonc, “The Concepts of Balance, Congruity and Dissonance,” Pub/it OpirPion Quarter/y 24 (1 960): 280-296. Reprinted with permission of the University of Chicago Press.NEWCOMB’S SYMMETRY THEORYSocial psychologist Theodore M. Newcomb took Heider’s idea of balance out ofthe head of one person and applied it to communication between people. Heuses the term symmetry to distinguish it from balance theory and contends thatwe attempt to influence one another to bring about symmetry (or balance orequilibrium). As discussed in some detail in Chapter 3, Newcomb postulates thatattempts to influence another person are a function of the attraction that oneperson has for