People who bet against their favorite team might tell themselves that they actually don't like the team. Which strategy would they be using? making the dissonance public trivializing the cognitions adding a third cognition changing one of the cognitions

In this scenario, people who bet against their favorite team and tell themselves that they actually don't like the team are likely using the strategy of **changing one of the cognitions**. Here's the reasoning: 1. **Cognitive Dissonance**: This occurs when a person holds two conflicting beliefs or attitudes. In this case, the conflict arises from being a fan of the team (positive cognition) and betting against them (negative cognition). 2. **Changing One of the Cognitions**: To reduce the dissonance, the individual may change their belief about their feelings towards the team. By convincing themselves that they don't actually like the team, they align their beliefs with their actions (betting against the team), thus reducing the discomfort caused by the dissonance. The other options do not fit as well: - **Making the dissonance public**: This involves sharing the conflict with others, which does not directly address the internal conflict. - **Trivializing the cognitions**: This would mean downplaying the importance of the conflicting beliefs, which is not what is happening here. - **Adding a third cognition**: This would involve introducing a new belief to reconcile the conflict, but in this case, the individual is changing an existing belief rather than adding a new one. Therefore, the correct strategy being used is **changing one of the cognitions**.