attitudes and attitude change Flashcards
Attitude
is a psychological tendency that is expressed by evaluating a particular entity with some degree of favor or disfavor (Eagly & Chaiken, 1995).
Psychological tendency…
refers to a state that is internal to the person, and
Evaluating…
refers to all classes of evaluative responding, whether overt or covert, affective, behavioral, or cognitive.
Affective
feelings, emotions, moods, sympathetic nervous system activity
Behavioral
actions, behaviors
Cognitive
thoughts, ideas, beliefs, cognition, knowledge, opinions, information, inferences
self-report measures
- likert scale
2. semantic differential scale
Likert scale
agree/disagree
Charles Osgood’s Semantic differential scale
focused on connotative meaning 7-point scale with adj at both anchors 3 dimensions: 1. evaluative factor (good-bad) 2. potency factor (strong-weak) 3. activity factor (active-passive)
physiological measure
- Galvanic skin response
2. facial electromyogram
Galvanic Skin Response
arousal > sweat > increase the conductivity of skin
tell us intensity only but not direction
facial electromyogram
happy > greater EMG activity in depressor and zygomatic muscles
measure direction and intensity
zygomatic muscles
zygomaticus major:
Elevates and draws angle of mouth laterally
Zygomaticus Minor:
Elevates and everts upper lip
depressor
DEPRESSOR ANGULI ORIS
Depresses and draws angle of mouth laterally
DEPRESSOR LABII INFERIORIS
Depresses and draws lower lip laterally
Duchenne smile
Non-Duchenne involves only zygomatic major muscle which raises corners of the
mouth
Duchenne Smile involves contraction of both zygomatic major muscle and orbicularis oculi muscle which raises the cheeks and forms crow’s feet around the eyes
unobtrusive measurement
random response technique
persuasion
dual processing models:
Petty and Cacioppo’s elaboration likelihood model
Chaiken’s heuristics systematic model
Hovland’s paradigm of attitude change
Petty and Cacioppo’s elaboration likelihood model
Theory:
Specifies conditions that stimulate message-related thinking
Postulates alternative peripheral cues mechanisms when those conditions are not met
Assumptions:
Validity seeking
but extent and nature of processing depends on motivation and ability to process message
Central processing
Argument based
Stable, resistant to changes, link with behavior better
IF the recipient is MOTIVATED AND has the ABILITY to PROCESS the MESSAGE, then
if argument is strong, recipient will be persuaded
if argument is weak, recipient will not be persuaded or will experience a boomerang effect
IF the recipient is MOTIVATED AND has the ABILITY to THINK about the ISSUE, then
if message is pro-attitudinal, recipient will be persuaded
if message is counter-attitudinal, recipient will not be persuaded or will experience a boomerang effect
Peripheral processing
Mechanisms that results in persuasion in the absence of argument scrutiny
Less stable, less resistant to change, and does not link with behavior well
CHAIKEN’S HEURISTIC-SYSTEMATIC MODEL
Assumption
Validity seeking
But extent and nature of processing depends on Efficiency and Sufficiency
Whatever the process employed, it must produce “valid” attitudes that the individual is confident of
Systematic processing
Careful, thoughtful analysis of the relevant information
Heuristics processing
Base on cognitive heuristics—simple rules of thumb—rather than careful analysis
Heuristics simplify processing by providing assumptions or rules that allow us to make rapid judgments
E.g., “Experts give good advice”, “The majority is usually correct”, “Statistics don’t lie
Principles of Efficiency
use the most efficient processing
mode, i.e., by default use heuristic
processing
Recipients under time pressure favor heuristic processing
demand higher efficiency
Principles of Sufficiency
need to be sufficiently confident
about the validity of the resultant
attitude
Recipients who know the attitude object well favor systematic processing
demand higher confidence in their resulting attitude
EFFICIENCY + SUFFICIENCY =
CONFIDENCE
Combining the two principles: 1. engage in heuristics processing first 2a. if heuristics processing alone generates enough confidence, systematic processing is not necessary 2b. if heuristics processing alone does NOT generate enough confidence, use systematic processing
Situational or individual differences
distraction (heuristic),
low need for cognition (heuristic),
high ability (systematic),
high accountability (systematic)
HOVLAND’S PARADIGM OF ATTITUDE CHANGE
Who says What? How? to Whom?
Counter-argumentation
the central element in determining attitude change
an internal debate that provides an alternative position and supports it
Counter-arguing is an important component of reactance, as has been shown by Rains (2013). If people are confronted with a message that (overtly) intends to persuade them, they feel threatened in their freedom to act
(Brehm, 1966). This feeling may lead to reactance, a motivational state in which people try to re-establish their
freedom. As a result, they are more on guard and more resistant to attitude change (Wood and Quinn, 2003).
Who?
Credibility
Trustworthiness
Expertise
Attractiveness
Single vs. Multiple sources
multiple sources even more effective when
arguments are strong conveying different arguments
Says what?
Drawing conclusion
best for complex messages
One-sided vs. two sided
best if target is knowledgeable
Fear arousal
interacts with chronic fear arousal
HOW?
Distraction
helps weak arguments
interferes comprehension of strong arguments
Overhearing
source becomes more credible
to Whom?
Intelligence
For messages lacking supportive arguments, high intelligence people were less persuaded than low intelligence people
For messages including complex argumentation, persuasion and retention of message content was greater for high
intelligence people
self-esteem
medium: most easily persuaded
low-esteem people are too distracted and withdrawn to receive the message
high self-esteem people yield less to the message because they are especially confident of their own opinions
self-esteem
an inverted U-shape relation
Message recipients with high levels of self-esteem receive (i.e., attend to and comprehend) more of the message
than those low in self-esteem;
low-esteem people are too distracted and withdrawn to receive the message.
Recipients high (vs. low) in self-esteem yield less to the message because they are especially confident of their own
opinions.
The combination of reception and yielding processes results in a curvilinear relation between individual attributes
and influence such that recipients possessing middle self-esteem levels are easier to influence than those possessing
high or low levels.
Low self-esteem recipients demonstrate little reception; high self-esteem recipients demonstrate little yielding
COGNITIVE DISSONANCE THEORY
FESTINGER, 1957
Two cognitions or cognition and behavior are incongruent
Incongruent in cognitions or such leads to
discomfort/dissonance
Resolve dissonance by modifying one of the cognitions or behavior
behavior cannot be undone, thus changing
cognition
LIMITING CONDITIONS OF COGNITIVE DISSONANCE
Freedom of choice
Without choice, a person can justify his/her counter-att behavior
Commitment
Commitment makes one cognition resistant to change
Aversive consequences
Bring about a situation that one would rather not have occurred.
Personal Responsibility
Diffusion of responsibility reduces dissonance/att-change
WEAK ATTITUDE-BEHAVIOR LINK
THEORY OF REASONED ACTION
Behavioral intention Attitudes towards behavior Behavioral beliefs Evaluation of the consequences Subjective norm Normative beliefs Motivation to comply
Behavioral belief
Belief that the behavior leads to certain outcomes
Evaluation of the consequences
Normative beliefs
Beliefs that specific referents think I should or should not perform the behavior
Motivation to comply with the specific referents
Perceived Behavioral Control
people’s perceptions of their ability to perform a given behavior.
