(automatic) attitudes and behaviour 1 lect 3 Flashcards
why are attitudes studied
may be able to predict, change, cause behaviour
do attitudes guide behaviour
LaPiere (1934)
-reported trip around america with chinese friends (prejudice against chinese at this time)
-visited hundreds of hotels and restaurants and only got refused entry to 1 place
-6 months later, sent a questionnaire to each place they visited
-92% responses said they would refuse entry to chinese people BUT this was not the reality
-clear discrepancy between attitude and behaviour
Wicker
-meta analysis
-average correlation between attitude and behaviour was .15
-maybe attitudes do not predict behaviour
what do smith and mackie claim we should be asking about attitudes
how and under what conditions do attitudes predict behaviour?
what is the function of attitudes for behaviour
-efficient processing of info, processing shortcuts (smith and mackie)
-efficient guides to behaviour
-pre established evaluations that easily come to mind
-we might not even be aware there is a decision e.g escalator or stairs
historic characteristics of automatic processes (Bargh and Kunda)
-occur outside of awareness
-unintended (un volitional)
-uncontrollable
-efficient (do not need many cog. resources)
what are the two main characteristics of social behaviours
kunda
-efficiency
-lack of awareness/intention
what is automatic activation of attitudes
when attitudes come to mind effortlessly and inescapably (fazio)
when do automatic attitudes come to mind
Fazio: attitude = association between internal representation of an object with an evaluation
-memory event, attitude target has become mentally associated with evaluation
-when object comes to mind, evaluation follows as the two have been associated in memory
-stronger mental link = stronger the attitude
what is attitude strength
association of an object representation and the evaluation of it
-strong object evaluation association leads to faster attitude accessibility
what is attitude accessibility
speed and ease of attitude activation
how are automatic attitudes developed
-evaluation is incorporated into the representation of the object over time (smith and mackie)
-associative memory
-more frequently they occur, the stronger the association
roskos , ewoldson and fazio study
-pp evaluated series of attitude objects (attitude rehearsal)
-control pp presented with objects but instead of giving attitudinal response (pos/neg), they give non attitudinal response (is it animate or inanimate)
-subsequent testing involved pp asked to provide evaluations
-experimental group were able to respond faster due to rehearsed more accessible attitudes
-repeated object evaluation pairings enhanced attitude accessibility
are attitudes accessed automatically
Fazio
-evaluative priming task
-phase 1: pp presented with objects and respond whether they think it is good/bad, response speed recorded, faster response = stronger attitude
-phase 2: pp shown normatively pos (delightful) and neg (repulsive) words, pp respond as quickly as they can
-these words presented with primes just before presentation of target words
-primes were words from previous phase 1 which pp responded quickly to (had stronger attitude towards)
-where target and prime shared same valance (pos/neg), pp responded quickly compared to diff valance
-automatic evaluations of the prime occurred effecting evaluation of target
automatic attitudes and spontaneous behaviour
-spontaneous behaviour will occur when attitudes are easily activated (Fazio and Zanna)
-automatic attitudes influence spontaneous behaviour not volitional ones
-stronger the attitude = more likely spontaneous behaviour will follow (be attitude consistent)
fazio et al study on spontaneous behaviour
-pp rehearse attitude towards set of puzzles
-pp given free reign to play with puzzles if they want to
-whether pp engaged in puzzle depended on their attitude
-pos attitude = more likely to play with puzzle
-more attitude was rehearsed = more they would engage
-highly rehearsed post attitude = more likely to engage in puzzle
how do attitudes guide spontaneous behaviour
focusing attention
-strong like/dislike grabs attention
-people attend things that are salient
Calitri et al
-strong link found between strength of automatic attitude towards exercise and peoples likelihood to respond visually to exercise cues
fazio theory on attitude consistent behaviour
-attitudes make certain objects more salient
-we respond to salient features of object
-approach likeable things and avoid dislikeable things
-behave in a way consistent with accessible attitude
how do automatic attitudes influence behaviours
biasing interpretations
-assimilation and contrast effects
-ambiguous info may be interpreted as supportive of strongly held attitude
Lord, Ross and Lepper study on automatic attitudes
-pp shown ficticious reports about: pro/ anti capital punishment
-both reports had strengths and weaknesses
-pp divided into supporters and opponents of capital punishment
-reporters found supportive report more convincing
-death penality opponents found opposing report more convincing
-pre existing attitudes had clouded or influenced interpretation of capital punishment
-attitudes act as a filter through which we precieve the world and this effects the way we interpret incoming info and impacts our behaviour
what is the mode model
-hewstone: when either the motivation or opportunity to make a reasoned decision is low, only attitudes that are highly accessible will predict spontaneous behaviour
what is the nature of memory associations
single tag evaluation
-we have mental representation of entire entity of object when linked to an evaluation
what is the idea that memory is involved
when encountering an attitude object we refer to an existing memory of an evaluation
critique of the idea memory is involved
Bargh
-pp not aware they are making evaluations
-asked to read words from screen (normatively pos or neg words)
-words primed by another valance loaded word
-pp asked to read target word
-when prime and target word share valance = fast responding
-when valance is inconsistent = slower responding
what does study by Bargh show
as the only thing in common was the valance, the process involving memory of shared meaning cannot be involved
does context influence automatic attitudes
Mitchell
-black athletes and white politicians
-either emphasised target person’s occupation or race
-pp automatically evaluated black athletes as more pos than white politicians when task emphasised occupation
-when task emphasised race, white politicians viewed more pos
-attitudes are effected by context
how do we explain context effects on automatic attitudes
attitudes automatically derived from memory BUT not attitude object as entire entity that now has a single tag to an evaluation
-many things come to mind per moment that are valance loaded
-attitude towards object in valance loaded context is the sum of all pos and neg in that moment
