Title: Attitudes
1Attitudes
2Defining Attitudes
- an enduring response disposition toward a person,
object or idea - three components
- Affective
- e.g., transfer of affect
- transferring feelings for one object to another
associated with it - Behavioral
- e.g., Bems (1972) self-perception theory
- Cognitive
- e.g., weighing the pros and cons of different
attitudes
3Defining Attitudes
Affect(feeling)
Cognition(belief)
Overall attitude
Behavior(response)
4Theories of Attitudes
- Biological Theory of Attitudes
- Twin studies
- fraternal vs. identical
- attitudes are probably indirectly affected by
genes - presence of attitude genes?
5Theories of Attitudes
- Explicit vs. Implicit Attitudes
- Explicit
- conscious endorsement of attitudes
- Implicit
- involuntary, uncontrollable, unconscious
- measurement of these types of attitudes remains
controversial
6Theories of Attitudes
- Learning Theory
- Hovland et al., 1953
- attitudes as habits
- information/feelings acquired through association
- reinforcement/punishment ? learning
- imitation of attitudes ? acquisition
7Theories of Attitudes
- Cognitive Consistency Theories
- attitude consistency
- Balance Theory
- Cognitive Dissonance
8Theories of Attitudes
- Balance Theory (Heider, 1958)
- Assumes we are driven to maintain consistency
between our sentiment and unit relations
9Theories of Attitudes
A Related Object, Person, Attribute, or
Consequence
O
P
The Person
X
The Attitude Object
10Theories of Attitudes
11Theories of Attitudes
O
O
O
O
-
-
-
-
P
P
P
P
-
X
X
X
X
-
Four Balanced Configurations
O
O
O
O
-
-
-
-
P
P
P
P
X
-
X
X
X
-
Four Imbalanced Configurations
- Main Assumption we strive to balance imbalanced
situations
12Theories of Attitudes
- Cognitive Dissonance Theory (Festinger, 1957)
- the tendency to seek consistency among cognitions
(e.g., beliefs, opinions) - inconsistency creates dissonance
- attempt to eliminate dissonance
13Theories of Attitudes
- Eliminating Dissonance
- ? importance of dissonant beliefs
- ? consonant beliefs to outweigh dissonant beliefs
- change the dissonant beliefs so they are no
longer inconsistent - Usually results in attitude change
- as opposed to behavior change
14Theories of Attitudes
- Self-Perception Theory
- Bem (1967)
- we infer our attitudes from our behavior
- e.g., Youve noticed you tend to vote for
younger candidates in elections so you infer that
you have a preference for younger politicians - Although outcomes tend to be the same, the
processes described by self-perception theory and
cognitive dissonance theory are fundamentally
different
15Theories of Attitudes
- Expectancy-Value Theory (Edwards, 1954)
- the pros and cons of holding an attitude and the
likelihood that these outcomes will occur
determine our decisions - e.g., I'm more motivated to work on my English
class because I know that I'm a good writer and
can do well. - attitude good writer, can do well
- behavior work on paper
16Theories of Attitudes
- Dual Process Theories
- Heuristic vs. Systematic processing of persuasive
message (Eagly Chaiken) - Systematic Processing
- careful review and consideration of arguments
- Heuristic Processing
- using simple decision rules
- e.g., more is better an expert said it so it
must be true
17Theories of Attitudes
- Elaboration-Likelihood Model (ELM)
- Petty Cacioppo (1986)
- Central vs. Peripheral Routes to Persuasion
- Central Routes
- involved, need accuracy, recognize that a message
is persuasive - Peripheral Routes
- uninvolved, distracted, busy
- for most practical purposes, the ELM and the
Heuristic/Systematic theory are identical
18Theories of Attitudes
- Cognitive Response Theory
- Romero, Agnew Insko (1996)
- thoughts generatated in response to a persuasive
message determine whether we support the message
or not - Counterarguing
- resisting discrepant communications by actively
rebutting the arguments - No counterarguments ? attitude change
- Lots of counterarguments ? no attitude change
19Persuasion
- Persuasive messages are part of everyday life
- The effectiveness of a persuasive message depends
on - the communicator
- the communication
- the target
20Persuasion
- The Communicator
- Credibility
- high credibility ? more persuasive
- Expertise
- expert sources ? more persuasive
- Trustworthiness
- trustworthy sources ? more persuasive
- those who seem to be making an argument contrary
to self-interest are more persuasive - multiple sources of information make a message
more trustworthy
21Persuasion
- Liking
- those we like ? more persuasive
- Reference Groups
- groups we like ? more persuasive
- Source Derogation
- when faced with a persuasive message inconsistent
with our own attitudes, we can call the
communicators reliability into question or make
negative claims about the person - future messages from the same source will carry
less weight - Communicator as Peripheral Cue
- e.g., An expert said it, so it must be true
22Persuasion
- The Communication
- discrepancy from our own position
- low Discrepancy ? little attitude change
- high Discrepancy ? little attitude change
- moderate Discrepancy ? most attitude change
- greater credibility allows for more discrepancy
(Bochner Insko, 1966) - arguments close to our own are viewed as closer
than they actually are (assimilation) and those
very discrepant from our own are view as further
away than they actually are (contrast)
23Persuasion
- Strong vs. Weak Arguments
- persuasiveness depends on our level of processing
- Repetition of Argument
- Cacioppo Petty (1979)
- increases persuasiveness up to a point
- think of an annoying commercial that is always
on - in general, repetition helps strong arguments but
hurts weak arguments
24Persuasion
- Peripheral cues and message characteristics
- we use peripheral cues when
- an issue has little importance to us
- were uniformed or distracted
- source characteristics and the number and length
of arguments will increase persuasion if the
above conditions are met
25Persuasion
- Matching the persuasive message to the nature of
the attitude - e.g., appealing to anger in an argument when the
audience is angry is more likely to be persuasive - recall the three components to attitudes
- Distorting the Message
- can achieve cognitive consistency between our own
behavior and persuasive messages of others
through distortion of the message - Blanket Rejection
- dismissing an argument for no apparent reason
26Persuasion
- The Target
- Aggression Arousal
- personal frustrations can cause us to advocate
aggressive responses - Fear Arousal
- increasing fear in the target increases the
persuasiveness of a message up to a point - moderate levels of fear are most persuasive
27Persuasion
- Ego Involvement
- Attitudes highly relevant to the self are hard to
change - commitment to the attitude
- issue involvement (personal relevance)
- response involvement
- individual differences
- some people more persuadable than others
28Persuasion
- The Situation
- Forewarning
- knowing that an argument is about to be made
reduces persuasion - counterarguments can be made in the intervening
period - Distraction
- mild amounts enhance persuasion
- counterargument process is affected
29Persuasion
- Attitude Innoculation (McGuire, 1964)
- being exposed to weak arguments counter to our
own attitude makes us more resistant to later
exposure to complex counter-attitudinal
persuasive arguments
30Attitude Change Over Time
- Spontaneous Attitude Change
- Tesser (1978)
- merely thinking about an attitude object will
make our attitudes about it more extreme - Persistence of Attitude Change
- Sleeper Effect
- delayed attitude change not apparent immediately
after exposure to the persuasive message
31Attitudes and Behavior
- Do attitudes predict behavior?
- attitude strength
- attitude stability
- attitude accessibility
- automatic activation of attitudes
- relevance of attitudes to behavior
- salience of the attitude
32Attitudes and Behavior
Theory of reasoned actionFishbein Ajzen, 1975
Beliefs about consequences of behavior X
Attitude toward behavior X
Intention to perform behavior X
Behavior X
Normative beliefs about behavior X
Subjective norm concerning behavior X
33Attitudes and Behavior
Theory of Planned Behavior (Ajzen, 1991)