Lecture 2: Indirect Measurement, Attitude Functions, & Attitude Strength

Question 1

indirect measurement (1)

Answer 1

• Based on the assumption that stronger (therefore more accessible) associations activate evaluations quickly, which then influences the speed at which we respond.

Question 2

implicit association test (IAT) (3)

Answer 2

• Respondents classify adjectives and attitude objects as fast as possible.
• A faster reaction time indicates a stronger attitude.
• Gained widespread popularity, used for a variety of things.

Question 3

problems with the IAT (4)

Answer 3

• IAT is based off the assumption that responses can’t be controlled, and is less susceptible to outside influence than direct measurement.
  
  • But people can exert some control over the IAT (e.g. purposely going slower) and context matters (e.g. showing liked pictures of black people before a Black-White IAT);
• It’s unclear how much respondents scores reflect their own attitudes vs. their knowledge of others’ attitudes.
• IAT only measures a relative not absolute favorability.

Question 4

physiological indirect measures (3)

Answer 4

• The galvanic skin response (GSR) and pupillary dilation are two methods that don’t rely on response time.
• Facial EMG, ERPs, and fMRIs.
• Problem: more sensitive to strength than valence.

Question 5

facial electromyography (facial EMG) (2)

Answer 5

• Assesses contractions of facial muscles, which have a distinct pattern of activation for true vs. fake emotions (e.g. a smile).
• Problem: difficult to administer, expensive, and difficult to analyze the data.

Question 6

event-related potentials (ERPs) (2)

Answer 6

• Measures electrical activity in the brain.
• Helped us understand the time course in which individuals make attitudinal judgments.

Question 7

functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) (2)

Answer 7

• Shows where blood and oxygen are in the brain, i.e. activity.
• Helped us understand what brain regions are active when recalling/reporting an attitude.

Question 8

Fazio, Blasovich, & Driscoll (1992) (7)

Answer 8

• Provided evidence for the functionality of attitudes.
• The strength of association in memory between an attitude object and one’s evaluation determines how accessible it is.
  
  • Strong, i.e. highly accessible, attitudes will guide our decisions in a spontaneous manner.
• Attitudes help us make quick decisions because we need less resources.
  
  • And decisions that are higher in quality, i.e. less likely to change at a later time.
• However, the benefits of attitudes may hold true for any construct that people might form (e.g. self-knowledge).
• Because attitudes are automatic and not likely to change, they can also make a person more close-minded.

Question 9

reliability (1)

Answer 9

• The degree to which scores are free from errors in measurement.

Question 10

internal consistency reliability (1)

Answer 10

• Asks: are the individual items assessing the same thing?

Question 11

test-retest reliability (1)

Answer 11

• Asks: are the scores consistent over time?

Question 12

validity (1)

Answer 12

• The extent that a measurement assesses the construct it was designed to measure.

Question 13

convergent validity (1)

Answer 13

• Asks: does it align/correlate with other measures?

Question 14

discriminant validity (1)

Answer 14

• Asks: is it uncorrelated with measures of other, irrelevant constructs?

Question 15

predictive validity (1)

Answer 15

• Asks: does it predict future behaviour?

Question 16

reliability and validity of explicit measures (2)

Answer 16

• High in reliability: the more items the better (if they’re similar), but even single item semantic differential scales have been shown to have high test-retest reliability.
• Often valid, when there isn’t a distinct socially acceptable answer.
  
  • Is higher when assessing simple attitude objects.

Question 17

reliability and validity of implicit measures (2)

Answer 17

• Appears to have high reliability, but it hasn’t been tested (e.g. the IAT has high test-retest reliability).
• High convergent validity, and good predictive validity.
  
  • Is generally higher when assessing simple attitude objects.

Question 18

relative strength (1)

Answer 18

• How much you favour/disfavour one attitude object relative to another, and is often what’s measured (explicitly and implicitly).

Question 19

absolute strength (1)

Answer 19

• How certain someone is of their attitude and how important it is to them.

Question 20

characteristics of strong attitudes (4)

Answer 20

• Persistent over time.
• Resistant to change.
• Likely to influence information processing.
• Likely to predict behaviour.

Question 21

Katz (1960) (1)

Answer 21

• Explored the primary and secondary functions of attitudes; i.e. object appraisal, utilitarian, value-expressive, and ego-defensive.

Question 22

object appraisal (knowledge) function (2)

Answer 22

• States that attitudes let us know whether we like or dislike an object so that we don’t have to make a new judgement every time.
• Some objects are more likely to fulfill only one function (e.g. air conditioner: utilitarian) whereas others fulfill multiple functions (e.g. handbags: utilitarian and value-expressive).

Question 23

utilitarian (instrumental) function (1)

Answer 23

• To approach things that meet our needs and maximize rewards, and to avoid punsihments and things that thwart our needs.

Question 24

value-expressive function (1)

Answer 24

• To reflect our central values and self-image/concept.

Question 25

ego-defensive function (1)

Answer 25

• To bolster or protect our self-esteem.

Question 26

problems with attitude functions (2)

Answer 26

• Ambiguity in distinction between different functions.
• Accessing functions largely requires conscious awareness, which is particularly problematic for ego-defensive functions because they’re most effective when a person is unaware of them.

Question 27

Pillaud et al. (2013) (9)

Answer 27

• Attitudinal ambivalence isn’t simply a weak attitude but is actually adaptive in social interactions.
• Participants used an open-ended measure to convey their attitudes towards a controversial topic (GMOs) and a non-controversial topic (tooth brushing).
• They did this in a control condition, and conditions where they were self-enhancing or self-depreciating.
  
  • Expressed more ambivalence towards GMOs in the self-enhancing vs. self-depreciating condition.
  • Expressed more ambivalence towards tooth brushing in the self-depreciating vs. self-enhancing condition.
  • Expressed less ambivalence towards tooth brushing in the control and self-enhancing conditions vs. GMOs.
• If you show ambivalence towards a controversial topic, it can show that you’re unbiased and more intelligent and also protect you from judgement.
• You shouldn’t show ambivalence towards a non-controversial topic because there’s a socially accepted right answer, and not knowing it makes you deviant/uneducated about the society.
• Certain boundaries exist to this rule, e.g. if there’s a socially acceptable answer towards a controversial topic.