Chapter 6 Flashcards
The nature of attitude
- Evaluation of a person, object or idea
Affective: feelings towards something
Cognitive: appraisal of pros and cons
Behavioural: look to what you do
-The significance of each component varies in terms of the issue in question.
- Issues that are tied to our symbolic beliefs (value system) will give rise to affectively-based attitudes; these are hard to change
- When attitude is weak or ambiguous we base our attitude on our behaviour
Ex; how do you feel about carrots = oh I don’t know, never thought about it; I don’t really eat them; guess I don’t like them
STUDY: Attitude toward homosexuality
- STUDY: 1993 – attitudes toward homosexuality
- Questionnaire with all three evaluations (affective, cognitive, behavioural)
A – feelings experiences when thinking about homosexuality
C – values promoted/hindered by homosexuality
C – characteristics homosexuals posses
B – frequency and nature of contact with homosexuals
RESULTS: the cognitive beliefs were the strongest predictors of overall positive or negative attitude
• In negative attitude: cognitive component most important
• In positive attitude: affective component most important
Attitude strength
Four component determining strength
1) Ambivalence (if you’re ambivalent, you don’t care – neutral)
- Vulnerable to change attitude
2) Accessibility
- How easily the attitude comes to mind
- More easily accessible = stronger attitude
3) Subjective experiences
- How easily you can generate arguments in favour of your position
- More easily = stronger attitude
4) Autobiographical recall
- How easily can you recall behaving in a manner consistent with your attitude
- Easily recall = stronger attitude
Attitudes and predicting behaviour
Spontaneous behaviours - Automatic processing - Attitude = highly accessible - Implicit attitudes Ex: sign a petition Deliberative behaviours - Controlled processing - Attitude = not highly accessible - Based on behavioural intentions - Explicit attitudes Ex: condom use
Theory of planned behaviour
STUDY: Anjzen – behavioural intention is determined by
1) Behavioural attitude
Ex: I care a lot about women’s issues, I want to participate in the women’s march
2) Subjective norms
- How people around me view that behaviours
Ex: I want to participate in the women’s march, but my friend’s think it’s stupid and too excessive
3) Perceived behavioural control
- Extent to which you think you can carry out the behaviour
Ex: I want to participate, but I can’t, I’m going to miss my class or work…
Example: Condom use - Factors influencing condom use Alcohol Environment (risk-taking) Mood Embarrassment/ridicule
Attitude change
Important to advertising
Yale advertising change approach
Yale Attitude Change Approach - WHO: Source of the communication
- Credible Obvious expertise Education Confidence Celebrities - Attractive Looks and personality
Yale Attitude Change Approach - WHAT: Nature of the communication
- Ppl. more persuaded by messages that do not seem to be designed to influence them
- Two-sided messages (for and against)
- Primacy effect – ppl more influenced by what they hear first: Better when speeches are back to back and delay before having to choose
- Recency effect – ppl remember most recent speech better than first: Better when speeches are one after the other and then have to choose right away
YACA- To WHOM: Nature of the audience
- Distracted audience is more easily persuaded than when not distracted
Why? When automatic; you just go along with it - Low intelligence = more easily influenced
- Moderate self-esteem = easily influenced than low or high
Why? High self esteem = know what we want etc therefore we just do it regardless and Low self-esteem = don’t take risks…so nothing chosen - Susceptible to attitude change when 18-25 y.o. (most likely younger than that)
- Beyond those ages people’s attitudes more stable
Elaboration likelihood model
- Depends on processing route – central vs. peripheral (control vs. automatic)
- Central motivation: motivation + ability to pay attention (actually pay attention and decide)
- Peripheral: no motivation + no ability (swayed by peripheral cues like attractiveness)
Heuristic-systematic persuasion model
- Depends on processing route – heuristic vs. systematic
- Systematic: motivation +ability to pay attention
- Heuristics: no motivation + no ability
Mood + route selection
Good mood = peripheral route, maintain mood
Bad mood = central route, analyze argument
Motivation and ability in attitude change
Motivation:
- Personal relevance of the topic
- Need for cognition – need to understand things and how things work
- High on need for cognition: focus on facts
- Low on need for cognition: focus on speaker
Ability:
- Complexity of argument
- Easy = central; difficult = peripheral
Route selected + permanency of change
Central route = more permanent/resistant attitude
Peripheral = attitude more easily swayed
Fear and attitude change
Can lead to attitude change only when
- Information about changing behaviour is available
- Level of fear - too intense we turn off