Question 53

Cognitive dissonance explains the smoker's reasoning.

The smoker's justification of smoking despite knowing the health risks illustrates cognitive dissonance, where conflicting beliefs lead to a rationalization that reduces psychological discomfort.

A) drive reduction

Drive reduction theory suggests that behavior is motivated by the desire to reduce internal tension caused by unmet biological needs. In this context, the smoker is not primarily addressing a biological need but rather justifying a behavior that is detrimental to health, making this option incorrect.

B) arousal theory

Arousal theory posits that individuals are motivated to maintain an optimal level of arousal. While the smoker may experience reduced stress, this option does not account for the conflicting beliefs about health risks and the need to rationalize this behavior, thus making it an incorrect choice.

C) incentive theory

Incentive theory focuses on external rewards and how they motivate behavior. Although the smoker finds smoking to be rewarding in terms of stress relief, this theory does not explain the internal conflict present in the smoker's reasoning. Hence, it is not the best explanation for the scenario provided.

D) cognitive dissonance

Cognitive dissonance occurs when a person experiences discomfort from holding two conflicting beliefs, prompting them to justify their behavior to alleviate this discomfort. The smoker's reasoning exemplifies this theory, as they rationalize smoking by emphasizing stress relief, despite being aware of the health risks.

Conclusion

Cognitive dissonance is the most fitting explanation for the smoker's reasoning because it directly addresses the conflict between their knowledge of smoking's dangers and their perceived benefits. The other options fail to capture the essence of this psychological conflict, making them inadequate in explaining the smoker's justification for their behavior.