Transcript Slide 1

Chapter 7 - Attitudes, Beliefs, and
Consistency
• What Are Attitudes and Why Do People Have
•
•
•
•
Them?
How Attitudes Are Formed?
Consistency
Do Attitudes Really Predict Behavior?
Beliefs and Believing
Attitudes and Beliefs
• Attitudes
•
– Global evaluations toward some object or
issue
Beliefs
– Information about something; facts or
opinions
Attitude
• Attitude = one's evaluative orientation toward
a person, thing, idea, etc.
– Do you like Shredded Wheat?
– Do you prefer lecture course or seminars?
– What's your favorite Friday evening
activity?
– Is Seinfeld funny?
Three Parts of Attitudes
• Cognitive
•
•
– Our knowledge of the attitude target
Affective
– Our feelings or beliefs toward the attitude
target
Behavioral
– Our intention to act toward the attitude
target
Dual Attitudes
• Different evaluations of the same target
• Implicit attitude
•
– Automatic evaluative response
Explicit attitude
– Conscious evaluative response
Dual Attitudes
• Some attitudes are not shared with others
– Stigma
• We may not be aware of all our own attitudes
– We may unconsciously dislike something
we consciously like.
Measuring Attitudes
• Self-Report Measures
•
– Open Ended Scales
– Likert Scales
Issues with Self-Report
– Reliability / Validity
– Assumes you know your attitudes
– Ambivalent Attitudes
– Self-Report Biases
Non-Verbal Measures
• Behavioral Measures – Overt behavior to
•
•
infer attitude
Physiological Measures – Arousal and
muscle action
Implicit Attitudes – Reaction time
Implicit Association Test (IAT)
• Measures implicit attitudes
– Those we are unwilling or unable to report
– Attitudes about stigmatized groups
Why People Have Attitudes
• Attitudes help us deal with complex world
• Attitudes are evaluations (like or dislike)
•
•
– Initial evaluations are immediate and
unconscious
Attitudes are helpful in making choices
Two Functions
– Object Appraisal
– Value-Expressive
Attitude Formation
• Genetic
• Affective
• Cognitive
• Behavioral
Attitude Formation - Genetic
• Genetic
– Tesser (1993) believed that some attitudes
are heritable.
– Some possibilities:
• Sensory
• Body Chemistry
• Intelligence
Attitude Formation - Affective
• Mere-exposure effect - Zajonc (1968)
– Repeated exposure increases liking for an
object
– Exception - If you dislike something
initially, repeated exposure will not change
that attitude
Attitude Formation - Affective
• Classical Conditioning
– Can form both explicit and implicit attitudes
– Develop a positive attitude toward the
conditioned stimulus
– Helps explain prejudiced attitudes
• Negative information in the media linked
to social groups
– Advertisers link celebrities and products
Attitude Formation - Affective
• Operant Conditioning
•
– Develop a positive attitude toward
something being reinforced
Social Learning
– Learn attitudes acceptable through
observation (Bobo Dolls)
Attitude Formation - Cognitive
• Evaluation of the merits of an object
• Polarization - Attitudes become more extreme
as we think about them
– Especially true in strong initial attitude
– Evaluate evidence in a biased manner
• Accept evidence that confirms attitude
• Accept evidence from ingroup members
Attitude Formation - Behavioral
• Bem’s Self-Perception Theory
– At work when we don’t have a well-defined
attitude
– “If I said it, it must be true”
– “If I ate it, I must like it”
– We are making an attribution about our
behavior.
Consistency
• Commonalities in theories about consistency
– Specify conditions required for consistency
and inconsistency
– Assume inconsistency is unpleasant
– Specify conditions required to restore
consistency
Balance Theory
• P-O-X Theory
•
– Person – Other Person – Attitude Object
Relationships among P-O-X
– Unit relationships – Things that belong
together
– Sentiment relationships – Liking or
Disliking (Attitudes)
Balance Theory
• Individuals prefer balanced to unbalanced
– Jim likes Sally (P + O)
– Jim is a vegetarian and dislikes eating meat (P X);
– Jim believes Sally to dislike meat (O - X).
• What happens when Jim realizes Sally likes
to eat meat?
Balance Theory
balanced (consistent) psychological states
+
+
-
+
-
-
+
+
-
-
-
+
imbalanced (inconsistent) psychological states
-
-
-
+
+
-
+
+
+
+
-
Balance Theory
• When we are balance, there is not need to
change.
– “I don't like John.
– John has a dog.
– I don't like the dog either.”
• When we are unbalanced, we are motivated
to change
– "I love my child.
– She made this ashtray.
– I hate the ashtray."
Cognitive Dissonance Theory
•
•
Cognitive dissonance refers to unpleasant state when
attitude and behavior are inconsistent
If there is an inconsistency between thoughts, you
will feel an unpleasant state of arousal (i.e., cognitive
dissonance) as a result.
– Causes people to rationalize their behavior and
bring their attitude into line with actions
•
Festinger & Carlson (1959)
Cognitive Dissonance Theory
Festinger & Carlson (1959)
Stage 1
– First, participants were asked to twist wooden
pegs placed in a board for 30 minutes.
– Second, participants were asked to put spools of
thread on to pegs and take them off again for 30
minutes.
Cognitive Dissonance Theory
Festinger & Carlsmith (1959)
Stage 2
– Participants were told that to test the effects of
motivation in this study tell the next participant that
the study was enjoyable and fun.
– Two experimental groups.
• Group A paid $1.00 for doing the “briefing”.
• Group B paid $20.00 for doing the “briefing”.
– Then, after they talked to the next participant, the
participants were asked how they felt about the
study.
Festinger & Carlsmith (1959)
Results
Step 1
Step 2
Payment
Step 3
Evaluation of
Task enjoyment
23.5
All participants
do the boring
task, and then
were asked to
tell next
participants
about task.
Group A, Lie
Paid $1.00
Group B,Lie
9.8
Paid $20.00
Group C, No lie 5.9
No pay
Traditional models of decision making:
Operant Conditioning
Choices should be driven by future consequences,
not past expenditures
• Operant Conditioning suggest the bigger the
reinforcer, the more likely someone is to
change their Attitude.
• Cognitive Dissonance theory/research shows
that Attitudes are changed more when
reinforcer is less.
Cognitive Dissonance Theory
• Effort Justification
– Aronson & Mills, 1959
– People seek to justify and rationalize any
suffering or effort they have made
Effort Justification
Initiation rites: Aronson & Mills (1959)
•
•
•
•
Three screening conditions
– Control (e.g. chair, table, sad, book)
– Mild (e.g. prostitute, virgin)
– Extreme (obscene words--sorry, I can’t put these
up!)
All participants then listen to sample tape of
discussion group
Discussion is horribly boring! (pre-tested)
Dependent variable: expressed liking for the
discussion group and desire to join
Example
You and a companion plan to go skiing at a resort. You each have
paid 100 dollars for lift tickets and rental. When you arrive, the
conditions are horrible—it’s cold, icy, and even the best lifts are
not operating because of the wind. In addition, you both feel
lousy physically and out of sorts psychologically.
Your companion turns to you and says, “It’s too bad that the money
is not refundable, we’d have a much better time back home,
relaxing in front of the fire. But I can’t afford to waste 100
dollars.”
You agree. But you also both agree that it’s unlikely that you will
have a better time struggling with the bad conditions on the
slopes, compared to being inside.
What do you do? Stay and ski, or go home?
Paid 100 dollars for tickets and equipment
(decrease in net assets by $100)
Stay and ski
Decision?
Give up and
go home
Staying at home feels aversive, because of the
sense that you have “wasted” the 100 dollars.
However, the past expenditure is irrelevant to your
decision, because it is a constant in both cases.
Lousy day skiing
(minus 100 dollars)
Better day at home
(minus 100 dollars)
Cognitive Dissonance Theory
• While people have desire to be consistent in
their own private mind, they have stronger
desire to be viewed consistent by others
• Self-presentation plays a role in cognitive
dissonance
Consistency
• Drive for consistency
– Rooted in our biology
– Strengthened by learning and socialization
• Consistency involves both automatic and
conscious parts of the mind
Do Attitudes Really Predict
Behavior?
Attacking Attitudes
•
Wicker (1969) argued against Allport and suggested
we abandon the study of Attitudes.
– Review of attitude-behavior studies (approx 50 studies)
• Average correlation [r] = .30
• % of variance in behavior explained = 9% (r2)
•
•
Link between attitudes and behavior is weak.
A – B Problem
– Inconsistency between attitude (A) and behavior (B)
When do Attitudes predict behavior?
• Predictions of behavior based on attitudes is
best when
– Measures of attitude are very specific
– Behaviors are aggregated over time and
situations (not one situation)
– Attitudes are consciously prominent and
influence thought regarding the choice
(priming)
– Attitudes are easily accessible
What else influences Behavior
Personality traits
Ability
Motivation
Attitude
Habit
Needs
Social pressure
Other attitudes
Behavior
Examples
• Personality
– Self-monitoring (Snyder & Swann, 1976)
– Private self-consciousness (Scheier et al.,
1978)
– Need for cognition (Cacioppo et al., 1986)
Self-monitoring (Snyder, 1974)
• Concern for social appropriateness
•
– Sensitive to self-presentation of others
– Used as guidelines for monitoring own selfpresentation
Two components of self-monitoring
– Interest in social information
– Ability to control self-presentation
Self-monitoring and
attitude-behavior correlations
• High self-monitors have lower attitude•
behavior correlations
Their behavior is less reflective of their actual
attitudes; more in line with what they think is
socially appropriate