attitude
a positive or negative reaction towards people or stimuli (e.g. attraction/prejudice)
ego-defensive function of attitudes
used to protect one’s self-image/ego, to be able to “live with oneself”
(we tend to like things we are good at - I am bad at this game = negative opinion of the game)
value-expressive function of attitudes
used to maintain one’s identity, stems from wanting people to see one’s “best side”, satisfaction comes from expression of own values
(forming an attitude to express a value - climate change is an important issue ⇒ attitude on anti-climate change stimuli would be negative (& vice versa))
adjustment function of attitudes
most reward and least punishment is the goal
(we tend to like things that bring us “good” (reward) (& vice versa))
knowledge function of attitudes
stems from the need for understanding and clarity, the search for meaning e.g. stereotypes
(forming an attitude towards a group of people based on previous information = helping one make sense of the world)
self-report measure of attitudes
attitude scales e.g. Likert scale
covert measures of attitudes
EMG (records facial muscles activity);
IAT (measuring speed at which people respond to pairs of concepts;
bogus pipeline (phony lie-detector used to get respondents to give honest answers on sensitive topics
evaluative conditioning
we form an atittude towards a neutral stimulus because it is associated with something/someone positive/negative
classical conditioning
a type of learning in which an initially neutral stimulus - theconditioned stimulus(CS) - when paired with a stimulus that elicits a reflex response - theunconditioned stimulus(US) - results in a learned, or conditioned, response (CR) when the CS is presented
e.g. Pavlov, just a reaction to a stimulus
theory of planned behavior
LaPiere’s study of attitudes
In a classic study, LaPierre (1934) drove through the U.S. with a Chinese couple.
They stopped at over 250 restaurants and hotels and were refused service only once.
Several months later, the owners were surveyed on whether they would serve Chinese people. The response was overwhelmingly negative, 92 percent of those surveyed said that they would not. In this case, clearly, their behavior gave less evidence of racial bias than their expressed attitudes did.
level of correspondence
attitudes correlate with behavior only when attitude measures closely match the behavior in question
influences on the strength of attitudes
= amount of information + how the information was acquired
= more stable and predictive of behavior when born of direct personal experience rather than secondhand information
= strengthened by an attack against it from a persuasive message (more confidence appears when successfully resisting change of the attitude)
= strong attitudes come to mind easily
cognitive dissonance theory
inconsistent cognitions arouse psychological tension that people become motivated to reduce
insufficient justification
when people freely perform an attitude-discrepant behavior without receiving a large reward
insufficient deterrence
when people refrain from engaging in a desirable activity even when only mild punishment is threatened
(the less severe the punishment threatened, the greater the attitude change produced)
justifying difficult decisions
we rationalize whatever we decide by exaggerating positive features of the chosen alternative
justifying effort
we alter our attitudes to justify our suffering
4 steps necessary for arousal and reduction of dissonance
ways to reduce dissonance (5)
self-affirmation
if a person acts in a way that contradicts their attitudes, if someone then praises them, they do not have to change their attitude to feel good and not feel dissonance
self-perception theory
our attitudes come from what we do, if we do something different, our attitude changes
impression management
changing one’s attitudes to attempt to influence the perceptions of other people about a person, object or event by regulating and controlling information in social interaction