attitude change Flashcards
what is cognitive dissonance theory (Festinger, 1987)
It is uncomfortable for people to hold two conflicting cognitions at the same time
thinking about two views that are dissonant with each other at the same time produces an aversitve state that motivates you to change one of those cognitions
should be able to change people’s attitudes by changing their behaviour
what is the cogntive dissonance interpretation of Festinger & Carlsmith’s (1959) experiment
idea that behaviour can change attitudes
created a strong attitude to a specific task that participants were asked to engage in
had to engage in two boring activities to establish the attitude ‘I don’t like this task’:
with one hand to take individuals off a tray and relpace them for 30 mins or turn 42 square pegs a quarter turn repeatedly for 30 mins
participants were then asked to tell a subsequent participant that the task is interesting and exciting, and will either be paid $20 or $1 for doing so (also control condition)
Idea is that $1 is not sufficient compensation to tell a lie, leaving them in a state of cognitive dissonance
Prediction that they will have to change their attitude that the task was in fact fun
The $20 condition should be sufficient to align all the cognitions so there will be no state of dissonance and thus no need to change attitudes
Control: don’t like the task
$20: don’t like the task
$1: do like the task
Appears to be evidence for cognitive dissonance theory
However there is an alternative explanation based on Bem’s self-perception theory
what is the self-perception theory (BEM, 1972) interpretation of Festinger & Carlsmith’s (1959) experiment
participants reflect on the experience and make judgements on the basis of what has happened
They ground their attitude in their self-perception of their behaviour
$1 condition: told someone else the task was exciting despite only being paid $1 so infer that they do think the task is enjoyable
$20 condition: told someone else the task was exciting because they were paid $20 so infer that they actually think the task is dull.
Similar to schackter’s theory of emotion where people self-attribute emotion partly based on inferences about their self-observed arousal
As a result Bem’s theory is seen as another form of self-attribution theory
Compare cognitive dissonance and self-perception
CD:
applies in situations where individuals are strongly aware of their attitude and engage in a behaviour that conflicts with this attitude
as attitude is salient, people are aware of the conflict between their attitude and behaviour which results in an unpleasant arousal state that motivates attitude change to reduce the dissonance
SP
applies when there is not strong awareness of attitudes and discrepancy between attitude and behaviour is low
what is the Yale approach
best ways to inspire different behaviours and persuade individuals
who says what to whom with what effect
who - source of persuasion
what - nature of the message they are delivering
whom - target of persuasion
how persuasion is delivered and communicated, how it is processed and what effect it has
thought to influence attention, comprehension and acceptance which generate different outcomes
how do source factors affect opinion and perception change
expertise, trustworthiness, likability, status, race and religion interact with attention
how do message factors affect affect change
order of arguments, nuance, type of appeal, explicit/implicit nature interact with comprehension
how do recipient factors affect action change
persuadability, initial position, intelligence, self-esteem and personality interact with acceptance
how has the yale model been criticised
focused which factors affect persuasion rather than how persuasion works as a process
many of the factors investigated don’t have consistent effects regardless of context
need to understand and explain this variability
what is the information processing model (Maguire, 1969, 1985)
focus on what kinds of cognitive processes participate in when exposed to persuasive communications
The more a person attends to a message, the more they are likely to yield to a message because they understand and internalise it better.
The longer they yield to a message, the more likely it is to lead to a change in attitude and subsequently behaviour.
This is not an accurate model.
what is inoculation (McGuire & Papagerogis, 1961)
exposure to weak arguments against persuasive communication provokes the production in counter arguments and so cause psychological resistance
then able to resist stronger arguments
people are not passive recipients of persuasive communications but active engagers who produce their own cognitive responses to the persuasions.
what did McGuire et al.’s (1961) study reveal about inoculation
Participants were presented with weak counter arguments for cultural truisms (attitudes most individuals are likely to subscribe to e.g brush teeth)
Those who were exposed to the weak counter arguments, subsequently had greater resistance to strong counter arguments.
Suggests the initial weak counter arguments spurred participants to develop their own defences to these criticisms. This process allowed them to resit the stronger counter arguments
what is the cognitive response approach (Greenwald, 1968)
Argue that recipients generate their own thoughts about persuasive communications as they are presented to them which involves making connections with prior beliefs and feelings about the topic of the persuasive communications, contingent on their responses might be affirming or dismantling, thus determining whether a persuasive communication is effective or not
how has the cognitive response approach influences methodology
led to the development of two distinct methodologies
thought listing: report and write down positive and negative thoughts being generated
comparing the effect of strong and weak arguments: Manipulate the extent to which participants engage in positive or negative cognitive response
If a recipient is exposed to a strong argument, they are likely to produce predominantly favourable thoughts.
If they are exposed to a weak argument, they are likely to produce predominantly unfavourable thoughts.
Allows us to explain why the same kind of factor can produce different effects on our attitudes, depending on context.
how do different strengths of persuasive message affect attitude change
strong arguments result in a predominantly favourable cognitive response and so attitudes change
weak arguments result in a predominantly unfavourable cognitive response so attitudes do not change
