When there is within decision-making any internal tension that may not be captured by cognition, there can be a resolution which appears to have not been a serious problem of decision-making at all and can often be detected by the emotional strength of the response. That emotional response may actually appear like "relief."
When that occurs, one must immediately ask the question, "Relief from what?" The answer may reveal an Identity in opposition and that becomes important if that Identity is the Super-ego that has a strong academic, scientific or Dharma base.
On other occasions, one may also find a strong relief, but a small nagging voice behind. It will not be strong enough to cause more tension or conflict but you will detect its presence if you sit quietly after making any decision that may be important.
Within Buddha Dharma of Mahayana we speak of the "two obscurations", the "obscuration concerning the knowable," 隐晦知识 冲突 (Sanskrit: jñeyā-varaṇa), and the "obscuration of conflicting emotions," 隐晦 冲动 冲突 (Sanskrit: kleśa-varaṇa).
In both cases there is a very clear Identity presence as the "I that knows" and as the "I that feels".
Obscuration concerning the knowable, 隐晦知识 冲突
We can consider this when there is conflict between two different beliefs, with the strength between them being equal and causing stress and tension, as a case of Dissonance in Beliefs.
The result is always an obscuration by the introduction of an element that has no relation to the truth concerning either belief. That new element invented by the mind in order to reduce the level of tension weights one belief or the other usually in the direction of a belief that is desire-oriented.
That obscuration concerning the knowable introduces an element that imbues the winning belief with a high level of certainty, producing an unassailable Identity position. There is never a knowledge of the dissonance itself as the tension and stress may be fully below the level of consciousness, although the two belief systems can be recognized and the solution considered as being correctly resolved.
Obscuration of conflicting emotions, 隐晦 冲动 冲突
In Chinese Dharma there are seven psychological so-called emotional states, although Dharma Psychology would amend these and increase their number:
To be alarmed, 驚
To fear, 恐
To act for pleasure, 喜
To have anger or aversion, 怒
To grieve, 悲
To be anxious, 憂
To be in the state of considering, 思
If then the experience of the state of considering is in conflict with the experience of aversion, and there is a equilibrium in that conflict, the resulting stress results in obscuration of one or the other.
That obscuration covers the dissonance and provides a false element weighting one theoretical emotion as a consequence. In the given example, either the aversive experience or the considering experience would be negated or overruled.
In the case of the obscuration of knowledge, while the Identity "me and mine" is clearly identifiable the actual factors of weighting can actually be either Visceral, Emotional or Mentally based, while the obscuration called emotional may be either viscerally or emotionally based.
In the case of the seven elements chosen by the early Chinese, to be alarmed would be an experience generated as a result of attention to an apparent threat, with a general Identity consciousness (I or me).
Fear, pleasure and aversion would be considered basically as impediments in the behavioral form as natural visceral consequences, and the remaining three emotional. Although fear, pleasure and aversion are considered as base impediments, the pleasure produces an emotional identity response and Aversion a mental Identity response. These three Identity responses would of course be subliminal and exist only inasmuch as they can be reified from memory sets.
To grieve 悲, to be anxious 憂, and to be in the state of considering 思 are with strong cognitive variations. But each of the three can be more directly related to the visceral Identity, the emotional Identity and the mental Identity respectively.
Now, one can never be certain that dissonance is present, but strong indicators are the strength of the belief and the strength of the emotional response. In terms of the belief dissonance, true logical or lateral thinking plays no part and although to another observing person there is no valid reason for the belief, the person who has experienced the subliminal dissonance will be certain of his or her decision to the point of apparent stubbornness.
In the case of emotional dissonance, there need be little actual reasoned or belief support for the element that solves the dissonance... Just a firm emotional conviction, to the point of being in the case of addictions the expression "It's beyond my control".
Thus an emotional addiction to computers may be conscious as an impediment to one's lifestyle, but justified by that singular phrase, "I am just drawn beyond my control".
So the stronger the conscious conviction of both the belief or emotion is, then the more probability of dissonance exists. There are naturally other strong belief adherences, but these are generally validated in social terms if the beliefs are socially accepted as being true.
Now a complication is the fact that visceral experiences also may have emotional and certainly mental associations attached, and emotional experiences may have mental associations attached, so what is required is a clear introspection to get to the roots.