We have all observed a recurring theme on WBF where the sonic merits of accessory X or tweak Y are debated. Some will dismiss the declared benefits of an accessory in the absence of scientific evidence or supporting objective data. Specifically, it has been suggested that the sonic enhancements for some of these tweaks are imagined by the consumer. This prompted me to share the major elements of a blog article I authored last year on cognitive dissonance. I acknowledge that a quick search reveals that this phenomenon has historically been touched on in these pages but I felt it was worthwhile to initiate a thread devoted to the subject. I will also add that I am not a licensed mental health professional.
As I embarked on my much longer than anticipated path in post-secondary education (I recently obtained my 6th and likely final degree in what can be described as a bizarre academic journey), I decided that my undergraduate major would be in psychology. One of the many interesting concepts imparted to me in social psychology was cognitive dissonance. Stated very simply, cognitive dissonance occurs when there is a discrepancy between our well-entrenched beliefs and conflicting information. This results in a feeling of psychological discomfort or stress. As humans, we are highly motivated to eliminate these unpleasant feelings. This is accomplished by resolving the cognitive dissonance. This can occur through a number of adaptive mechanisms such as rationalization or what is known as selective perception.
I will share an non-audio example. It is universally agreed that stretching can reduce the chances of injury before exercising. A research study was released that conclusively stated that excessive stretching will actually increase your chance of injury prior to exercise (the point of this article is not to debate the physiological merits of stretching – I am merely retelling a story). For those that engage in a regular and extensive pre-exercise stretching routine, this information would likely be a source of psychological stress. The unlikely response to alleviate the cognitive dissonance would be to put full belief into this new information and abandon our long-held stretching routine. A likelier response would be to rationalize our behavior (for example ‘I’ve been stretching for years and have not encountered an injury’) or selective perception (‘I’m sure that there is research to support stretching and this was probably a flawed study design’).
As mentioned previously, it has been argued that audio enthusiasts ‘convince’ themselves of phantom or imagined sonic benefits with an accessory upgrade. Why? If there was no discernable improvement to the sound of the system (or if the sound actually got worse), this would create psychological stress based on the time and money that was involved in the upgrade. To resolve this, we would therefore ‘hear’ an improvement in sound to reduce the cognitive dissonance. As we often have no means of measuring or objectively demonstrating the improvement we are hearing, skeptics will describe that this phenomenon is largely responsible for some of our perceptions of sonic enhancement.
In my 25-year audio journey, I have personally found that cognitive dissonance does not yield its power in the context of a familiar system. I will share a detailed account of one of my most memorable and significant audio purchases. When I graduated from professional school in 2007, I was going to gift myself with a new power amplifier. After hours of online research and several forum inquiries, I landed on two choices. My first choice was well-regarded in the audio press, was described as being musically engaging, and had an extremely appealing visual design (this remains an important part of my audio-related purchases). I proceeded to a local retailer to audition said amplifier in my system. I pre-authorized my credit card for the full value of the amp (equivalent to my savings at that time) and transported the 100-pound amplifier to my home. I will add that this was during a lag period in my employment where I completed my training but was still waiting to obtain my license. I therefore had an abundance of availability. During the waking hours of the next 72 hours, I listened to hundreds of tracks with this amplifier driving my speakers. Regardless of the type of music or volume, I could not musically connect with this amplifier. How does this contravene the concept of cognitive dissonance for us audiophiles? Well, I wanted nothing more at the time than to LOVE this amplifier. On paper, it had everything I desired in a stereo amp. Additionally, from a practical perspective, I did not want to endure the considerable chore of packing it up and returning it to the store. I was highly motivated for this to be my amplifier for the next 10 years. No matter how hard I tried (and tried and tried), I could not eliminate the cognitive dissonance with any of the tactics described earlier.
Does this example entirely refute the influence the cognitive dissonance in the context of high-end audio? Absolutely not. However, as mentioned, I believe the influence is diminished in familiar systems. Given our level of exposure, we can detect slight changes to the sounds of familiar recordings. I had low expectations that an audiophile network switch would result in better sound. I was quite frankly blown away by what I’ve heard. Conversely, while hearing transformational improvements after connecting my digital source to a grounding box, the sound rapidly deteriorated after then connecting my pre-amp to the same grounding chamber (I have since rectified this with a 2nd grounding box). Some of us have even experienced changes in sound in the absence of component upgrades. For example, superior sound can emerge during late-night listening sessions when consumption is low on the power grid versus mid-day listening in the summer during peak hours. Stated differently, we are hearing changes in our system that are not aligned with expectations or as a function of reducing our cognitive dissonance.
Our audio journeys are often characterized by a series of experiments to bring us closer to the recordings. We are constantly testing hypotheses with focused listening sessions. Sometimes the changes are apparent immediately, other changes become noticeable over time. While we can’t always express our evolution in superior sound with numbers or words, we can always feel it in our hearts and minds, even when those changes are unanticipated.
As I embarked on my much longer than anticipated path in post-secondary education (I recently obtained my 6th and likely final degree in what can be described as a bizarre academic journey), I decided that my undergraduate major would be in psychology. One of the many interesting concepts imparted to me in social psychology was cognitive dissonance. Stated very simply, cognitive dissonance occurs when there is a discrepancy between our well-entrenched beliefs and conflicting information. This results in a feeling of psychological discomfort or stress. As humans, we are highly motivated to eliminate these unpleasant feelings. This is accomplished by resolving the cognitive dissonance. This can occur through a number of adaptive mechanisms such as rationalization or what is known as selective perception.
I will share an non-audio example. It is universally agreed that stretching can reduce the chances of injury before exercising. A research study was released that conclusively stated that excessive stretching will actually increase your chance of injury prior to exercise (the point of this article is not to debate the physiological merits of stretching – I am merely retelling a story). For those that engage in a regular and extensive pre-exercise stretching routine, this information would likely be a source of psychological stress. The unlikely response to alleviate the cognitive dissonance would be to put full belief into this new information and abandon our long-held stretching routine. A likelier response would be to rationalize our behavior (for example ‘I’ve been stretching for years and have not encountered an injury’) or selective perception (‘I’m sure that there is research to support stretching and this was probably a flawed study design’).
As mentioned previously, it has been argued that audio enthusiasts ‘convince’ themselves of phantom or imagined sonic benefits with an accessory upgrade. Why? If there was no discernable improvement to the sound of the system (or if the sound actually got worse), this would create psychological stress based on the time and money that was involved in the upgrade. To resolve this, we would therefore ‘hear’ an improvement in sound to reduce the cognitive dissonance. As we often have no means of measuring or objectively demonstrating the improvement we are hearing, skeptics will describe that this phenomenon is largely responsible for some of our perceptions of sonic enhancement.
In my 25-year audio journey, I have personally found that cognitive dissonance does not yield its power in the context of a familiar system. I will share a detailed account of one of my most memorable and significant audio purchases. When I graduated from professional school in 2007, I was going to gift myself with a new power amplifier. After hours of online research and several forum inquiries, I landed on two choices. My first choice was well-regarded in the audio press, was described as being musically engaging, and had an extremely appealing visual design (this remains an important part of my audio-related purchases). I proceeded to a local retailer to audition said amplifier in my system. I pre-authorized my credit card for the full value of the amp (equivalent to my savings at that time) and transported the 100-pound amplifier to my home. I will add that this was during a lag period in my employment where I completed my training but was still waiting to obtain my license. I therefore had an abundance of availability. During the waking hours of the next 72 hours, I listened to hundreds of tracks with this amplifier driving my speakers. Regardless of the type of music or volume, I could not musically connect with this amplifier. How does this contravene the concept of cognitive dissonance for us audiophiles? Well, I wanted nothing more at the time than to LOVE this amplifier. On paper, it had everything I desired in a stereo amp. Additionally, from a practical perspective, I did not want to endure the considerable chore of packing it up and returning it to the store. I was highly motivated for this to be my amplifier for the next 10 years. No matter how hard I tried (and tried and tried), I could not eliminate the cognitive dissonance with any of the tactics described earlier.
Does this example entirely refute the influence the cognitive dissonance in the context of high-end audio? Absolutely not. However, as mentioned, I believe the influence is diminished in familiar systems. Given our level of exposure, we can detect slight changes to the sounds of familiar recordings. I had low expectations that an audiophile network switch would result in better sound. I was quite frankly blown away by what I’ve heard. Conversely, while hearing transformational improvements after connecting my digital source to a grounding box, the sound rapidly deteriorated after then connecting my pre-amp to the same grounding chamber (I have since rectified this with a 2nd grounding box). Some of us have even experienced changes in sound in the absence of component upgrades. For example, superior sound can emerge during late-night listening sessions when consumption is low on the power grid versus mid-day listening in the summer during peak hours. Stated differently, we are hearing changes in our system that are not aligned with expectations or as a function of reducing our cognitive dissonance.
Our audio journeys are often characterized by a series of experiments to bring us closer to the recordings. We are constantly testing hypotheses with focused listening sessions. Sometimes the changes are apparent immediately, other changes become noticeable over time. While we can’t always express our evolution in superior sound with numbers or words, we can always feel it in our hearts and minds, even when those changes are unanticipated.
