Editing Cognitive dissonance (section)

=== Politics ===
Cognitive dissonance theory might suggest that since votes are an expression of preference or beliefs, even the act of voting might cause someone to defend the actions of the candidate for whom they voted,<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/cognitive-dissonance-politics-prabhakar-mundkur/|title=Is there Cognitive Dissonance in Politics?|date=2016-07-11|work= LinkedIn | vauthors = Mundkur P }}</ref>{{self-published inline|date=November 2021}} and if the decision was close then the effects of cognitive dissonance should be greater.

This effect was studied over the 6 presidential elections of the United States between 1972 and 1996,<ref>{{cite journal | vauthors = Beasley RK, Joslyn MR |title=Cognitive Dissonance and Post-Decision Attitude Change in Six Presidential Elections |journal=Political Psychology |date=September 2001 |volume=22 |issue=3 |pages=521–540 |doi=10.1111/0162-895X.00252 |doi-access=free }}</ref> and it was found that the opinion differential between the candidates changed more before and after the election than the opinion differential of non-voters. In addition, elections where the voter had a favorable attitude toward both candidates, making the choice more difficult, had the opinion differential of the candidates change more dramatically than those who only had a favorable opinion of one candidate. What was not studied were the cognitive dissonance effects in cases where the person had unfavorable attitudes toward both candidates. The 2016 U.S. election held historically high unfavorable ratings for both candidates.<ref>{{Cite news|url=http://www.cnn.com/2016/03/22/politics/2016-election-poll-donald-trump-hillary-clinton/index.html|title=Poll: Trump, Clinton score historic unfavorable ratings| vauthors = Wright D |work=CNN|access-date=2017-12-08}}</ref>

After the [[US 2020 Election|2020 United States presidential election]], which was won by [[Joe Biden]], supporters of former President [[Donald Trump]], who had lost the election to Biden, [[Attempts to overturn the 2020 United States presidential election|questioned the outcome of the election]], citing [[voter fraud]]. This continued after such claims were dismissed as false by numerous judges, election officials, [[Governor (United States)|U.S. state governors]], and [[Federal government of the United States|federal government]] agencies.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.axios.com/cisa-election-security-trump-a385868b-512a-4449-addd-4591829a4aef.html |date=November 12, 2020 |title=Department of Homeland Security calls election 'the most secure in American history'| vauthors = Chen S |website=Axios|access-date=December 8, 2020|archive-date=December 2, 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201202044452/https://www.axios.com/cisa-election-security-trump-a385868b-512a-4449-addd-4591829a4aef.html|url-status=live}}</ref> This was described as an example of Trump supporters experiencing cognitive dissonance.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.afr.com/life-and-luxury/arts-and-culture/the-real-reasons-why-trump-supporters-believe-they-were-robbed-20201207-p56l7s |date=December 11, 2020 |title=Why Trump supporters believe they were robbed| vauthors = Maddock J |website=The Australian Financial Review|access-date=June 19, 2021|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201211010736/https://www.afr.com/life-and-luxury/arts-and-culture/the-real-reasons-why-trump-supporters-believe-they-were-robbed-20201207-p56l7s |archive-date=2020-12-11 }}</ref>

Electoral politics can feature more than just policy disagreements. People seek to reduce their cognitive dissonance when making any choice. <ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Bernhardt |first1=Dan |last2=Krasa |first2=Stefan |last3=Polborn |first3=Mattias K. |date=2006 |title=Political Polarization and the Electoral Effects of Media Bias |url=https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.892475 |journal=SSRN Electronic Journal |doi=10.2139/ssrn.892475 |issn=1556-5068|hdl=10419/25843 |hdl-access=free }}</ref> Engagement in the electoral process can change policy references, drawing on the framework of cognitive dissonance theory. The idea suggests that cognitive dissonance created by being vocal about support and losing leads voters to align their preferences more closely with those of the supported candidate. <ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Artiga González |first1=Tanja |last2=Capozza |first2=Francesco |last3=Granic |first3=Georg D. |date=December 2024 |title=Cognitive dissonance, political participation, and changes in policy preferences |journal=Journal of Economic Psychology |language=en |volume=105 |pages=102774 |doi=10.1016/j.joep.2024.102774|doi-access=free }}</ref> Voting itself is a support activity that may led to preference changes.

Modernly, social media has affected politics. Recognizing this, creators can profit from a social media relationship between votes and candidates. For example, a celebrity endorsing a candidate can cause their followers to lose sight of policy and focus on the opinion of the person they follow, causing cognitive dissonance. <ref>{{Cite web |last=Desai |first=Ishika |title=Political campaigns foster cognitive dissonance through social media reliance |url=https://spartanshield.org/45905/opinion/political-campaigns-foster-cognitive-dissonance-through-social-media-reliance/ |access-date=2025-04-11 |website=Spartan Shield}}</ref> Social media trends like "Kamala is Brat" <ref>{{Cite web |last=McDermott |first=Luke |date=2024-08-05 |title=The LGBTQ+ Impact in Politics: Why is Kamala "BRAT"? - Luke McDermott |url=https://victoryinstitute.org/the-lgbtq-impact-in-politics-why-is-kamala-brat-luke-mcdermott/ |access-date=2025-04-11 |website=LGBTQ+ Victory Institute |language=en-US}}</ref> have rallied fans. As a result, voters are less focused on a candidates' plans for office, and more on the social media attention stirred.