Attitudes, Behavior, and Rationalization

Attitude: An evaluation of an object or behavior in a positive or negative way (Fishbein & Ajzen, 1975).
- Represents how much one likes or dislikes something.
- The attitude object can be anything, including people, objects, and issues.

Attitude comprises three components:
- Affect: e.g. "I love it".
- Cognition: e.g. "I drink it every day".
- Behavior: e.g. "It wakes me up".

Involve self-report surveys.
Common way to measure attitudes through self-reports.
Likert scale: A numerical scale to assess attitudes, presenting a set of labeled anchors from Strongly Disagree (1) to Strongly Agree (5).
- E.g.
- "Dogs are very lovable."
  1. Strongly Disagree
  1. Strongly Agree
Pros:
- Easy to write questions.
- Simple to administer.
Cons:
- Prone to social desirability bias.
- Might not capture the full extent of the attitude.

Indirect measurements that do not require self-reports.
1. Used when participants may be unwilling/unable to express true feelings.
2. Capture nonconscious attitudes - immediate evaluative reactions, often unsuspected by individuals.

Response Latency: Time taken to respond to stimuli about attitude.
- Assesses the accessibility of an attitude.
- E.g. Asking, “How good of a president would Ronald Reagan be?” as a predictor for voting behavior (Fazio & Williams, 1986).
Centrality of Attitudes: Ensures attitudes regarding a topic are consistent with attitudes on related issues.
- Example: If abortion is vital for someone, their views should correlate with views on sex education and stem cell research.
Implicit Association Test (IAT): Measures strength of association between concepts (like social groups) and evaluations (e.g., good or bad).

Pros:
- Response time indicates attitude accessibility.
- Less impacted by social desirability bias.
Cons:
- More challenging to administer, time-intensive, often requires computers, and does not provide the complete picture of a person's attitudes.

Relationships between attitude and behavior are complex and reciprocal.
Behavior influences attitude and vice versa.
- Example from LaPiere (1934):
- Study observed responses toward a Chinese couple in restaurants; 90% said they wouldn’t serve them yet only 1 in 250 denied service.
- Insight: Real behaviors may differ from expressed attitudes.
Other example manifestations include skipping medical check-ups despite positive attitudes towards health professionals or shopping at a disliked store.

Other determinants may influence behavior:
- Situational Factors: Time pressure affecting 'Good Samaritan' behavior (Darley & Batson, 1973).
- Introspection: Misleading reasons may obscure true attitudes resulting in a weak link to behavior.
General vs. Specific Attitudes:
- Mismatch can occur where general attitudes about a subject don't translate to actions taken regarding specific cases (e.g. donating to Greenpeace versus a general concern for the environment).

Individuals are motivated to maintain cognitive consistency between thoughts, feelings, and behaviors to minimize discomfort.
Two primary theories:
- Cognitive Dissonance Theory: Proposed by Leon Festinger (1962) explains the inconsistency among thoughts and actions leads to dissonance that individuals are motivated to reduce.
- Self-Perception Theory: People infer their own attitudes by observing their behavior and context instead of experiencing discomfort.

Viewed as a less emotionally charged approach compared to cognitive dissonance; posits that people infer their attitudes from their behaviors.
Key Differences: Cognitive Dissonance implies an aversive physiological state whereas Self-Perception denotes observational inference without discomfort.

Other sources of tension (social-political commitment, mortality awareness) also feel discomfort needing resolution:
- System Justification Theory: Posits that people rationalize social systems even when they are not beneficial to them (e.g., women believing they deserve less pay).
- Terror Management Theory: Managing mortality anxiety through symbolic immortality and adherence to cultural standards leads to enhanced in-group biases.

Attitude Definitions:
1. Attitudes evaluate behaviors;
2. Affective component recognized through emotional response;
3. Explicit vs. Implicit measure differences.
Real-life applications illustrating theory principles (e.g., contrasting perspectives and biases linked to testing themes).

Understanding attitudes, their components, measuring techniques, and their relationships with behavior provides invaluable insights into human psychology and social interactions. Attitudes are complex and influenced by numerous cognitive and social factors, demanding a multifaceted approach to their study.