In the criminal trial of Eugene de Kock, aspects of his murderous rampage were attributed to his purported experience of cognitive dissonance (CD), emotional blunting and posttraumatic stress disorder. This paper will critique the use of CD in this particular case and explore the theoretical underpinnings of CD. A few examples from the court record will be used to illustrate the place of CD in explaining perpetrators' actions.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AronsonE. (1992). The return of the repressed: Dissonance theory makes a comeback. Psychological Inquiry, 3, 303–352.
2.
BemD.J. (1967). Self-perception: An alternative interpretation of cognitive dissonance phenomena. Psychological Review, 74, 183–200.
3.
De KockE. (1998). A long night's damage: Working for the apartheid state. Saxonwold: Contra Press.
4.
FazioR.ZannaM.CooperJ. (1977). Dissonance and self-perception: An integrative view. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 13, 464–479.
5.
FestingerL. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Stanford, California. Stanford University Press.
6.
FestingerL.CarlsmithJ.M. (1959). Cognitive consequences of forced compliance. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 58, 203–210.
7.
HintonA. L. (1996). Agents of death: Explaining the Cambodian genocide in terms of psychosocial dissonance. American Anthropologist, 98, 818–831.
8.
MurphyP.L.MillerC. (1997). Postdecisional dissonance and the commodified self-concept: A cross-cultural examination. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 23 (1), 50–62.
9.
StroebeW.JonasK. (1988). Attitudes. In NewstoneM.StroebeW.CodolJ.StephensonG. (Eds.). Introduction to social psychology (pp 167–195). Oxford Blackwell.
