Stockholm Syndrome and Cognitive Dissonance

Stockholm Syndrome in relationships is not uncommon. Law enforcement professionals are painfully aware of the situation — making a domestic dispute one of the high-risk calls during work hours. Called by neighbours during a violent physical spousal abuse incident, the abuser is passive upon arrival of the police, only to find the abused spouse upset and threatening the officers if their abusive partner is arrested for domestic violence. In truth, the target knows the abuser/controller will retaliate against him/her if 1) they encourage an arrest, 2) they offer statements about the abuse/fight that are deemed disloyal by the abuser, 3) they don’t bail them out of jail as quickly as possible, and 4) they don’t personally apologise for the situation — as though it was their fault.

Stockholm Syndrome produces an unhealthy bond with the controller and abuser. It is the reason many victims continue to support an abuser after the relationship is over. It’s also the reason they continue to see “the good side” of an abusive individual and appear sympathetic to someone who has mentally and sometimes physically abused them.

Throughout history, people have found themselves supporting and participating in life situations that range from abusive to bizarre. In talking to these active and willing participants in bad and bizarre situations, it is clear they have developed feelings and attitudes that support their participation. One way these feelings and thoughts are developed is known as “cognitive dissonance”.

Cognitive Dissonance explains how and why people change their ideas and opinions to support situations that do not appear to be healthy, positive, or normal. In the theory, an individual seeks to reduce information or opinions that make him or her uncomfortable. When we have two sets of cognitions (knowledge, opinion, feelings, input from others, etc.) that are the opposite, the situation becomes emotionally uncomfortable. Even though we might find ourselves in a foolish or difficult situation — few want to admit that fact. Instead, we attempt to reduce the dissonance — the fact that our cognitions don’t match, agree, or make sense when combined. “Cognitive Dissonance” can be reduced by adding new cognitions — adding new thoughts and attitudes.

For example:

Heavy smokers know smoking causes lung cancer and multiple health risks. To continue smoking, the smoker changes his cognitions (thoughts/feelings) such as
“I’m smoking less than ten years ago”,
"I’m smoking low-tar cigarettes”,
"Those statistics are made up by the cancer industry conspiracy”, or
"Something’s got to get you anyway!” These new cognitions/attitudes allow them to keep smoking and actually begin blaming restaurants for being unfair.

A 40,000 Sport Utility Vehicle that gets 8 miles a gallon and is justified (rationalised) the expense and related issues with:
“It’s great on trips” (you take one trip per year),
"I can use it to haul stuff” (one coffee table in 12 months), and
"You can carry a lot of people in it” (95% of your trips are driver-only).

A spouse/boyfriend becomes abusive and assaultive and the target believes that can’t leave due to the finances, children, or other factors. Through cognitive dissonance, they say “He only hits me open-handed” and “She had a lot of stress at work.”

Leon Festinger first coined the term “Cognitive Dissonance”. He had observed a cult (1956) in which members gave up their homes, incomes, and jobs to work for the cult. This cult believed in messages from outer space that predicted the day the world would end by a flood. As cult members and firm believers, they believed they would be saved by flying saucers at the appointed time. As they gathered and waited to be taken by flying saucers at the specified time, the end-of-the-world came and went. No flood and no flying saucer! Rather than believing they were foolish after all that personal and emotional investment — they decided their beliefs had actually saved the world from the flood and they became firmer in their beliefs after the failure of the prophecy. The moral: the more you invest (income, job, home, time, effort, etc.) the stronger your need to justify your position. If we invest in a raffle ticket, we justify losing with “I’ll get them next time”. If you invest everything you have, it requires an almost unreasoning belief and unusual attitude to support and justify that investment.

Studies tell us we are more loyal and committed to something that is difficult, uncomfortable, and even humiliating. The initiation rituals of college fraternities, Marine boot camp, and graduate school all produce loyal and committed individuals. Almost any ordeal creates a bonding experience. Every couple, no matter how mismatched, falls in love in the movies after going through a terrorist takeover, being stalked by a killer, being stranded on an island, or being involved in an alien abduction. Investment and an ordeal are ingredients for a strong bonding — even if the bonding is unhealthy. No one bonds or falls in love by being a member of the Automobile Club or a music CD club.

Investment in an unhealthy R

Abusive relationships produce a great amount on unhealthy investment in both parties. Several types of investments keep us in the bad relationship:

1. Emotional Investment
We’ve invested so many emotions, cried so much, and worried so much that we feel we must see the relationship through to the finish.

2. Social Investment
We’ve got our pride! To avoid social embarrassment and uncomfortable social situations, we remain in the relationship.

3. Family Investments
If children are present in the relationship, decisions regarding the relationship are clouded by the status and needs of the children.

4. Financial Investment
In many cases, the controlling and abusive partner has created a complex financial situation. Many targets remain in a bad relationship, waiting for a better financial situation to develop that would make their departure and detachment easier.

5. Lifestyle Investment
Many Abusers use money or a lifestyle as an investment. Targets in this situation may not want to lose their current lifestyle.

6. Emotional and Sexual Investment
We often invest emotional and sexual intimacy. Some targets have experienced a destruction of their emotional and/or sexual self-esteem in the unhealthy relationship. The abusing partner may threaten to spread rumours or tell intimate details or secrets. A type of blackmail using intimacy is often found in these situations.

In many cases, it’s not simply our feelings for an individual that keep us in an unhealthy relationship — it’s often the amount of investment. Relationships are complex and we often only see the tip of the iceberg in public. For this reason, the most common phrase offered by the target in defence of their unhealthy relationship is “You just don’t understand!”

Combining Two Unhealthy Conditions

The combination of “Stockholm Syndrome” and “cognitive dissonance” produces a target who firmly believes the relationship is not only acceptable, but also desperately needed for their survival. The target feels they would mentally collapse if the relationship ended. In long-term relationships, the targets have invested everything and placed “all their eggs in one basket”. The relationship now decides their level of self-esteem, self-worth, and emotional health.

For reasons described above, the target feels family and friends are a threat to the relationship and eventually to their personal health and existence. The more family/friends protest the controlling and abusive nature of the relationship, the more the target develops cognitive dissonance and becomes defensive. At this point, family and friends become targets of the abusive and controlling individual.

Importantly, both Stockholm Syndrome and cognitive dissonance develop on an involuntary basis. The target does not purposely invent this attitude. Both develop as an attempt to exist and survive in a threatening and controlling environment and relationship. What might have begun as a normal relationship has turned into a controlling and abusive situation. The target is trying to survive. Their personality is developing the feelings and thoughts needed to survive the situation and lower their emotional and physical risks. All of us have developed attitudes and feelings that help us accept and survive situations. We have these attitudes/feelings about our jobs, our community, and other aspects of our life. As we have found throughout history, the more dysfunctional the situation, the more dysfunctional our adaptation and thoughts to survive. The target is engaged in an attempt to survive and make a relationship work. Once they decide it doesn’t work and can’t be fixed, the healing starts.

This post is a combination of several pieces of research on trauma.

V


Freedom is just another word for nothing left to loose.
V 64, WAW