Attitudes and Attitude Change Notes
Attitudes & Attitude Change
- Definition of Attitude: An evaluative orientation toward a specific object, encompassing:
- Affect (emotions, feelings)
- Cognition (beliefs, ideas)
- Behavior (predispositions to act)
Components of Attitude
- Cognitive Component:
- Beliefs, ideas (e.g., "Gun owners end up shooting themselves more often than they shoot thieves.")
- Affective Component:
- Emotions, feelings (e.g., "Guns frighten me.")
- Behavioral Component:
- Predispositions to act (e.g., "I vote for gun-control advocates whenever possible.")
Origins of Attitudes
- Cognitively-based
- Affectively-based via learning
- Classical conditioning
- Operant conditioning
- Behaviorally-based (self-perception)
- Genetically-based (???)
The Attitude-Behavior Link
- Attitudes often do not predict behavior well.
- LaPiere (1934)
- Wicker (1969)
- When do attitudes predict behavior?
- Strength/Accessibility
- Direct vs. Indirect Acquisition
- Congruent specificity
Specific Attitudes as Better Predictors of Behavior
Specific attitudes are better predictors of behavior.
Table 7.1 illustrates this, showing attitude toward using birth control pills during the next 2 years has a stronger correlation () with behavior than a general attitude toward birth control ().
Factors Influencing Attitude-Behavior Prediction
- Strength/Accessibility
- Direct vs. Indirect Acquisition
- Congruent specificity
- Social Desirability
Theory of Planned Behavior
- Specific attitude toward the behavior
- Subjective Norms
- Perceived behavioral control
- Behavioral Intention
- Behavior
The Role of Automaticity in Attitude-Behavior Relations
- Explicit (Conscious) Attitudes
- Implicit (Non-Conscious) Attitudes
Persuasion: The Process of Attitude Change
- Key Concepts
- Source: Who or what is doing the persuading
- Target: The person at whom the persuasion attempt is directed
- Message: The content and nature of the persuasive message
- Discrepancy: The distance of the message from the target’s current attitude
Central & Peripheral Routes to Persuasion
- Central Route:
- High effort, analytical processing.
- Elaborate, cogent arguments evoke enduring agreement.
- Peripheral Route:
- Low effort, not analytical or involved.
- Cues trigger liking and acceptance, often only temporarily.
Source Variables in Persuasion
- Attractiveness
- Credibility
- Perceived Expertise
- Credentials
- Speech Cues
- Perceived Trustworthiness
- Self Interest
- Perception of persuasive intent
- Perceived Expertise
Target Variables in Persuasion
- Expertise
- Involvement/Self-Relevance
- Self-esteem
- Need for cognition
- Gender
- Mood
- Janis et al. Yale “peanuts & Pepsi” study
- The effect of fear (Leventhal et al. 1967)
Positive Mood Enhances Persuasive Effect
- Janis et al. (1965) study showed that subjects who read with a snack were more influenced by persuasive messages.
Fear + Preventive Information = Attitude/Behavior Change
- Leventhal et al. (1967) demonstrated that combining fear-inducing films with preventive information leads to attitude and behavior changes (e.g., reduced smoking).
Message Variables
- 1 vs. 2-sided message
Persuasive Effect of 1 vs. 2-sided Messages
- Hovland et al. (1949) found that the effectiveness of 1-sided vs. 2-sided messages depends on the target's initial position.
Message Variables
- Discrepancy from target’s current position
- Large discrepancy leads to no attitude change, falling within the latitude of rejection.
- Small discrepancy leads to attitude change, falling within the latitude of acceptance.
- Greater attitude change occurs with messages in the latitude of non-commitment.
Message Discrepancy and Source Credibility
- Message discrepancy interacts with source credibility (Aronson, Turner, & Carlsmith, 1963).
Message Variables
- Strength/Quality of Argument
- When does it make a difference?
- Target mood (Bless et al., 1990)
- Target involvement (Petty, Cacioppo, et al. 1981)
- When does it make a difference?
Effect of Argument Strength and Target Mood
- Bless et al. (1990) showed that argument strength has a greater effect on attitude change when the target is in a sad mood.
Effect of Argument Strength and Target Involvement
- Petty, Cacioppo, et al. demonstrated that argument strength matters more when target involvement is high.
Effecting Attitude Change
- Matching persuasion attempt to attitude basis
- The phenomenon of Psychological Reactance
- Resisting attitude change through Attitude Inoculation
- How effective is subliminal persuasion?
Matching Persuasion Attempt to Attitude Basis
- Shavitt (1990) found that matching the persuasion attempt to the attitude basis (cognitive vs. affective) is more effective.
When Persuasion Backfires: Psychological Reactance
- Pennebaker & Sanders (1978) showed that demanding signs can lead to increased graffiti due to psychological reactance.
Attitude Inoculation against Peer Pressure to Smoke
- Hirschman & Leventhal (1989) demonstrated that attitude inoculation can reduce the percentage of students smoking over time.
Subliminal Persuasion: Does It Work?
- The Gore Prescription Plan: Bureaucrats Decide