Chapter 4 - How do Attitudes Influence Behaviour? Flashcards
Expectancy-Value Models of behaviour (2)
- Theory of Reasoned Action
- Theory of Planned Behaviour
Used to describe prediction of INTENTIONAL behaviour
Theory of Reasoned Action
1 a. Individual’s attitude toward behaviour
1 b. Subjective norms about whether to perform behaviour
2. Behavioural Intentions
3. Behaviour
What is Attitude derived in in TRA? (2)
Attitude = (1) expectancy behaviour will produce desired consequence * (2) value attached to this consequence
What are Subjective Norms determined by in TRA? (2)
Norms = (1) normative beliefs about how ppl important to them expect them to act * (2) individual’s motivation to comply
Which is a better predictor of intention/attitude in TRA - attitude or norms?
Attitude 80% of the time
Added element to Theory of Planned Behaviour
Perceived behavioural control (self-efficacy)
Actions influenced by whether people feel they can perform the behaviour
How does perceived behavioural control affect behaviour in TRB? (2)
- Directly on behaviour (it can be performed)
2. Indirectly through behavioural intentions
Dimensions of saliency (2)
- +ve or -ve outcomes
- Instrumental (material/literalcosts/benefits) vs. emotional (self/affect cost/benefits outcomes
Beliefs made more salient than others may change behaviour
Risk as Feelings Hypothesis
Emotional reactions often drive behaviour when cognitive and emotional reactions conflict (explains risky behaviour when people know instrumental risks)
Effect of private vs. collective-self saliency on attitudes and norms (Ybarra and Trafinow)
- Private-Self Cognition - individual’s self-assessment (I am funny)
- Collective-Self Cognition - how individual feels judged by others (My family thinks I’m funny)
If asked to think about self intentions more correlated to attitudes, if asked to think about family/friends then intentions correlated more to norms
Implementation Intention
‘If-then’ plans that specify behaviours person will need to perform to achieve a goal
Frees up cognitive capacity for other, different tasks
Breast Self-Examination study related to implementation intention
Writing down where and when will perform BSE, months later intention 64% did vs. 14% control
Other variables which affect behaviour (4)
- Moral beliefs
- Personal need for satisfaction
- Anticipated -ve self-conscious emotions
- IDs in self-efficacy
Limits of TPB
You cannot control all behaviours (ex. dyadic, two-person interactions where each person’s attitudes/norms/intentions affect actual behaviour)
Effects of lack of knowledge/cog support and thinking about reasons for attitude on attitude (Wilson et al.) (3)
- Ps who lack cognitive support for attitude tend to access random subset of reasons that reflect a more positive or negative view than the person normally expresses
- After analyzing reasons (COGNITION), if original attitude was based on AFFECT there was low attitude-behaviour correlations
- Influence of verbalization on behaviour decays and will return to original affective bias
The MODE Model (Fazio)
Explains SPONTANEOUS actions with (1) motivation and (2) opportunity determinants of behaviour
MODE Model:
- High motivation + opportunity pathway
- Low motivation or opportunity pathway
- Deliberative processing > attitude activation > attitude influences behaviour
2 a. Spontaneous processing > high attitude accessibility > attitude activation > attitude influences behaviour
2 b. SP > low attitude accessibility > no attitude activation > attitude does not affect behaviour
Attitude accessibility is key**
MODE Model and 1984 Presidential Election of Reagan and Mondale
Measured attitudes of candidates and their votes 5 months later
Results: ^ accessibility (faster RT) of attitudes led to ^ correlation w/ behaviour
MODE Model and evaluation of effectiveness of death penalty
- read both an article that supported and one that did not support death penalty
- accessibility of attitude manipulated by asking P to express it 1 or 6 times
- motivation manipulated by being told conclusion would be compared or not
Results: Evaluations of articles consistent w/ Ps attitude if attitude accessibility was high and motivation was low , if AA high and motivation H then tried to overcome biases of attitude
MODE Model and prejudicial reactions
- Completed implicit and explicit measures of motivation to control prejudicial reactions
- Shown pics of black / white people and descriptions of them + rate on traits
Results: Spontaneous evaluations seen by implicit measures predicted behaviour when motivation was low, when motivation was high and spontaneous -ve attitude tried to overcompensate and rated black individuals more +vely
MODE Model department store study
- Store described favourably but camera department negatively (and vice versa)
- Asked where would shop for camera; motivation (justify or not), opportunity (time constraint or not)
Results: Ps based decision on camera department when motivated and w/o time pressure
Composite Attitude-Behavioural Model
Suggest link b/w attitudes, intentions and behaviour being moderated by things such as HABITS**
Also: utilitarian outcomes, attitude toward target, normative outcomes, self-identity outcomes
Why should habits be effective at predicting behaviour?
Automatic and occur w/o conscious monitoring; particularly impactful when willpower is low
According to Composite AB Model, when are intentions uniquely predictive of behaviour?
When Ps habits are weak. Otherwise habits are main predictor of behaviour
