Attitudes and Attitude Change : Attitudes and Attitude Change Social Psychology
Lecture 3
Dr Amanda Rivis
Learning Outcomes : Learning Outcomes By the end of this lecture, and with independent study, you should be able to:
Define “attitude”
Discuss the origins, structure and functions of attitudes
Evaluate methods for measuring attitudes
Discuss the link between attitudes and behaviour
Discuss theories of attitude change
What is an “attitude”? : What is an “attitude”? An attitude is:
“a relatively enduring organisation of beliefs, feelings, and behavioural tendencies towards socially significant objects, groups, events or symbols” (Hogg & Vaughan 2005, p150)
“..a psychological tendency that is expressed by evaluating a particular entity with some degree of favor or disfavor” (Eagly & Chaiken, 1993, p. 1)
The different origins of Attitudes: Classical Conditioning : The different origins of Attitudes: Classical Conditioning (A)
The Different Origins of Attitudes: Instrumental Conditioning : The Different Origins of Attitudes: Instrumental Conditioning
The Different Origins of Attitudes: Imitation : The Different Origins of Attitudes: Imitation Social Learning Theory (Bandura 1977):
Attitudes are learned through imitation and modelling. Parents and society influence attitude
Attitude Structure : Attitude Structure Three-component model views attitudes as having three components:
Affective = feelings about the attitude object
Behavioural = predisposition to act towards the attitude object in a certain way
Cognitive = beliefs about the attitude object
Any given attitude may be based in lesser or greater amounts on any of these components
Functions of Attitudes : Functions of Attitudes Value-Expressive function
enable us to express who we are and what we believe in
Ego-defensive function
enable us to project internally-held conflicts onto others (e.g., homophobia)
Knowledge function
enable us to know the world
Utilitarian Function
Enable us to gain rewards and avoid punishment
How are attitudes measured? Overt Attitude Measures : How are attitudes measured? Overt Attitude Measures Self-report (single-item) attitude measures
Advantages:
Easy and quick to administer
Relatively cheap
Disadvantages:
Responses may not be reliable, e.g.,
Question wording
Mood
Social desirability (but see bogus pipeline technique)
Assume people have an attitude! (cf. “spontaneous” attitudes)
How are attitudes measured? Overt Attitude Measures : How are attitudes measured? Overt Attitude Measures Attitude scales
Multiple items are used to measure the same construct
Eliminate some of the problems of single-item measures (e.g., reliability)
Some of the more popular scales include:
Likert scale
Osgood’s Semantic Differential Scale
Expectancy-Value Scale (Fishbein, 1971)
How are attitudes measured? Example of Expectancy-Value Approach : How are attitudes measured? Example of Expectancy-Value Approach
How are attitudes measured? Covert Measures : How are attitudes measured? Covert Measures Covert Attitude Measures (CAM). These measures use physiological arousal to infer attitudes:
Electro-myograph (EMG). (Petty & Cacioppo 1981) which may include heart rate & pupil dilation
Galvanic Skin Response (GSR) : measures physiological arousal detected through skin resistance (Porier & Lott 1967)
How are attitudes measured? Evaluation of Covert Measures : How are attitudes measured? Evaluation of Covert Measures More objective than self-report measures
Physiological measures (e.g. GSR) can be caused by fear or anger
Physiological measures cannot assess the direction of affective responses
How Well Do Attitudes Predict Behaviour? : How Well Do Attitudes Predict Behaviour? Early research evidence suggested a weak to moderate link between attitudes and behaviour (e.g., LaPiere, 1934; Wicker, 1969)
More recent research has examined moderators of the attitude-behaviour relationship, e.g.,
Attitude strength
Direct experience with the attitude object
Attitudinal ambivalence
Correspondence of attitudinal and behavioural measures
How Well Do Attitudes Predict Behaviour? Correspondence of Attitudinal and Behavioural Measures : How Well Do Attitudes Predict Behaviour? Correspondence of Attitudinal and Behavioural Measures Source: Davidson & Jaccard (1979)
How Well Do Attitudes Predict Behaviour: Ajzen’s (1991) Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB) : How Well Do Attitudes Predict Behaviour: Ajzen’s (1991) Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB) This model posits an important mediator of the attitude-behaviour link, namely behavioural ‘intention’
The TPB holds that attitudes combine with other important factors in predicting intentions and, in turn, behaviour:-
Perceived social pressure
Factors that may facilitate or inhibit performance of the behaviour
Theory of Planned Behaviour (Ajzen, 1991) : Theory of Planned Behaviour (Ajzen, 1991) Perceived
Social
Pressure Perceived
Behavioural
Control
Theories of Attitude Change: The Yale Attitude Change Approach (Hovland, et al. 1953) : Theories of Attitude Change: The Yale Attitude Change Approach (Hovland, et al. 1953) According to this approach, attitude change/persuasion influenced by 3 factors:-
Source – originator of communication
Message – features of communication itself
Audience – characteristics of who is receiving the message
Theories of Attitude Change: The Yale Attitude Change Approach (Hovland, et al. 1953) : Theories of Attitude Change: The Yale Attitude Change Approach (Hovland, et al. 1953) Characteristics of Source
Credibility
Expertise
Trustworthiness
Attractiveness
Similarity
Appearance
Theories of Attitude Change: The Yale Attitude Change Approach (Hovland, et al. 1953) : Theories of Attitude Change: The Yale Attitude Change Approach (Hovland, et al. 1953) Message Factors
One-sided vs. Two-sided messages
Order of messages
Primacy Effects –v-
Recency Effects
Repetition
Theories of Attitude Change: The Yale Attitude Change Approach (Hovland, et al. 1953) : Theories of Attitude Change: The Yale Attitude Change Approach (Hovland, et al. 1953) Characteristics of Audience
Distraction
Intelligence
Self-Esteem (?)
Age (18-25 year olds most susceptible)
Problem: what conditions determine the relative importance of these factors?
Petty & Cacioppo’s (1986) Elaboration Likelihood (dual-process) Model of Persuasion (ELM) : Petty & Cacioppo’s (1986) Elaboration Likelihood (dual-process) Model of Persuasion (ELM) ELM holds that there are two ‘routes’ to attitude change:
Central route to persuasion occurs when we think critically about message content and are swayed by the strength and quality of its arguments.
Peripheral route to persuasion occurs when we do not do much thinking but are swayed by employing heuristics on the basis of non-content cues (e.g., “experts know best”)
The Elaboration-Likelihood Model of Persuasion (Petty & Cacioppo, 1986) : The Elaboration-Likelihood Model of Persuasion (Petty & Cacioppo, 1986) Whether persuasion results from the central or the peripheral processing route depends upon:
Ability
e.g., attention, ‘receptive’
Motivation
Personal Involvement
The Elaboration-Likelihood Model of Persuasion (Petty & Cacioppo, 1986) : The Elaboration-Likelihood Model of Persuasion (Petty & Cacioppo, 1986)
Theories of Attitude Change: Cognitive Dissonance Theory (Festinger, 1957) : Theories of Attitude Change: Cognitive Dissonance Theory (Festinger, 1957) This theory of self-persuasion holds that:
Cognitive inconsistency creates a state of psychological tension (i.e., “dissonance”)
Such tension is aversive and motivating (where it poses a threat to the self)
Easiest form of dissonance reduction will be adopted
Cognitive Dissonance Theory and Attitude Change: Justifying Attitude-Discrepant Behaviour : Cognitive Dissonance Theory and Attitude Change: Justifying Attitude-Discrepant Behaviour
Festinger & Carlsmith (1959)
Theories of Attitude Change: Bem’s (1965) Self Perception Theory : Theories of Attitude Change: Bem’s (1965) Self Perception Theory According to Bem, attitude change does not need to result from dissonance
People infer their attitudes from their behaviour
Cognitive dissonance when attitude-behaviour discrepancy large self-perception when not so large (Fazio, et al. 1977)
Reading : Reading Hogg, M. & Vaughan, G. (2005) Social Psychology (4th Edition) Prentice Hall: London - chapter 5
Brehm, S, Kassin, S. & Fein, S. (2002) Social Psychology. Houghton Mifflin: London - Chapter 6
Aronson, E., Wilson, T., & Akert, R. (2005) Social psychology (5th Edition) - chapter 7
Morgan, C, King, R. & Robinson, N. (1979) Introduction to Psychology. McGrw-Hill: London- Chapter 14