The canonical example is of people paid to perform a boring task and then bribed to tell others that it's interesting. If they accept the bribe, they will then reduce their dissonance by genuinely believing that the task is interesting.
Perhaps you could expand a bit on this?
Is your result simplified and meant to generalize only in most cases? Or is this an all the time thing? I mean, it's possible for someone to know that the task is boring, but accept the bribe and just lie to others about it being interesting just to get the bribe. The whole time, before, during and after the bribe, they could always know that it's a boring task.
In psychology, cognitive dissonance theory clearly has a meaning. It is the idea that when someone holds two ideas that seem to be in conflict, they will come up with a third idea that will reduce that conflict.
Or, is the bolded "seem" in the above quote the key word here? Is CD generally defined as a situation that "seems like" such a thing? And not necessarily being that thing in reality? If so, then I understand... just looking for clarification.