Lecture 7: Attitudes and the Self

Question 1

Define:

attitude

Answer 1

A cognitive representation that summarizes an individual’s evaluation of a particular attitude object.

Question 2

Define:

attitude object

Answer 2

Anything that someone can hold an attitude toward. Could be a person, group, object, action, idea, etc.

Question 3

What are the two key dimensions of attitudes?

Answer 3

1. Direction (or Valence), i.e. Do you like or dislike it?
   
   • Positive–Negative
2. Intensity
   
   • More Intense–Less Intense

Question 4

What is an:

ambivalent attitude

Answer 4

When our attitudes towards objects are both positive and negative. This is not the same as having a neutral attitude.

• For example, chocolate cake. Your positive attitude is that the cake tastes good, but on the other hand your negative attitude is that cake is unhealthy. One reason this may occur is because attitudes can consist of both affective (e.g. taste) and cognitive information (e.g. health effects) which are at odds with one another.

Question 5

How did Olson and Fazio (2001) demonstrate the effects of classical conditioning on forming attitudes?

Answer 5

In this study, researchers paired Pokemon characters with other objects. (New studies have been done along the same lines using black and white faces.) This study is an example of the formation of new attitudes. Participants saw hundreds of pairings of photographs. Certain Pokemon characters are consistently paired with negative or positive objects. Of course, participants weren’t aware of this, so the researchers wanted to see if the participants formed new attitudes on these Pokemon just through this association. For example, they asked them: How much do you like Camrupt? How much do you like Pachirisu? Participants also preferred positively-paired characters over negatively-paired characters as measured on an implicit association test (IAT).

Question 6

What are the four key functions of our attitudes?

Answer 6

1. Utilitarian function: Help us identify rewards and threats.
2. Ego-defensive function: Help us avoid unpleasant realities about life and who we are.
3. Value-expressive function: Help us connect with other people and define who we are.
4. Knowledge function: Help us simplify and summarize our worlds.

Question 7

What is the utilitarian or instrumental function of attitudes?

Answer 7

Attitudes alert us to rewarding objects or situations we should approach, and punishing objects or situations we should avoid (e.g. food preferences).

Question 8

What is the ego-defensive function of attitudes?

Answer 8

This function enables us to maintain cherished beliefs about ourselves by protecting us from awareness of our negative attributes and impulses or from facts that contradict our cherished beliefs or desires. For example, if you got made fun of in gym class, you might develop a negative attitude toward all sports (“gym class is stupid, who cares about sports?”). Overall, it serves to protect us from unwanted thoughts and emotions.

Question 9

What is:

Terror Management Theory (TMT)

Answer 9

Proposes that in order to ward off the anxiety we feel when reminded of our own mortality, we cling to cultural worldviews and strongly held values out of a belief that by doing so, part of us will survive death. To do so, we may demonstrate increased religious conviction, increased patriotism, and/or greater conformity to cultural standards. This allows us to cling onto things that we know will exist even when we’re gone.

Question 10

What is the value expressive or social identity function of attitudes?

Answer 10

This function helps us express our most cherished values—usually in groups in which they can be supported and reinforced. Sharing attitudes with others provides us with a sense of belonging and connectedness. For example, children express political allegiance at a very early age, in part to express the values of a very important group—the family.

Question 11

What is the knowledge or object appraisal function of attitudes?

Answer 11

This helps us organize our understanding of the world, guiding how we attend to, store, and retrieve information. Most typically, we pay attention to and recall information that is consistent with our pre-existing attitudes.

• For example, when you’re buying ice cream you’ll pay attention to the flavour of the ice cream rather than the packaging (e.g. plastic or cardboard) which is irrelevant to the ice cream. This function also works with the utilitarian function to help you choose between things, like chocolate over vanilla. These functions both get at the striving for mastery.

Question 12

What are the two key factors in determining if an attitude will predict a behaviour?

Answer 12

1. Accessibility, i.e. How accessible is the attitude at the time of behaviour?
2. Specificity/Compatibility, i.e. How compatible is the attitude with the behaviour?

Question 13

How does attitude strength help determine whether or not an attitude will predict a behaviour?

Answer 13

Unsurprisingly, all other things equal, strong attitudes are better predictors of behaviour than weak attitudes. Strong attitudes are things that we’ve taken more time to think about, and are thus more resistance to change.

Question 14

How does attitude accessibility help determine whether or not an attitude will predict a behaviour?

Answer 14

In order to influence our behaviour, the attitude must come to mind. Some of our attitudes are simply more accessible than others. For example, you like Pepsi and you like Doritos, but you drink Pepsi everyday, whereas you only eat Doritos a few times a year. Your attitude toward Pepsi may be a lot more accessible, and so it may guide your behaviour more so than your attitude toward Doritos.

Question 15

How did Fazio, Powell, and Williams (1989) demonstrate the importance of attitude accessibility in determining whether or not an attitude will predict a behaviour?

Answer 15

• These researchers measured “attitude accessibility” by seeing how quickly people were able to provide their evaluation of an object (like or dislike). They presented them with a bunch of random snack-type products. Again, the idea is that if you drink Pepsi every day and you love Pepsi then that attitude is very accessible to you, so you should be able to draw upon this attitude very quickly. The examined behaviour was which objects people chose to take home as their reward.
• As the researchers predicted, participants were more likely to select those items for which they had highly accessible attitudes. For example, two participants may both report liking Snickers bars, but the student who reported their liking faster would be more likely to choose the Snickers as their gift.

Question 16

In general, when are attitudes most likely to come to mind?

Answer 16

In general, attitudes are more likely to come to mind if they are:

• Based on direct experience with the object;
• Based on elaborate processing;
• Personally important;
• And well-established and frequently used.

Question 17

How does attitude specificity and compatibility affect behaviour?

Answer 17

• Specific Attitude → Specific Behaviour
• Global Attitude → Global Behaviour

The idea is that a specific attitude won’t usually predict a global behaviour, and a global attitude won’t usually predict a specific behaviour. For example, your attitude toward the environment vs. attitude toward curbside recycling.

Question 18

How did Davidson and Jaccard (1979) demonstrate the importance of correspondence in determining whether an attitude predicts a behaviour with their birth control study?

Answer 18

The idea that you should measure the attitude toward the behaviour itself rather than the attitude toward the object. For example, taking birth control versus birth control pills themselves. The more specific your attitude measure the greater a correspondence to the behaviour.

Question 19

What is the:

theory of reasoned action

Fishbein and Ajzen (1975)

Answer 19

This theory predicts that attitudes toward the behaviour and subjective norms jointly influence our behavioural intentions, which in turn predict our actual behaviour. This theory was later updated by the theory of planned behaviour.

Question 20

What is the:

theory of planned behaviour

Ajzen (1988)

Answer 20

• Perceived control over the behaviour can impact your behavioural intentions. If you don’t believe you will be able to engage in the behaviour, why form an intention to do it?
• Perceived control also has a direct impact on the behaviour, to the extent that it reflects actual control with some degree of accuracy (i.e. can substitute as a measure of actual control over the behaviour). For example, you want to go to the store but believe it is closed, so you can’t. It doesn’t matter whether or not you want to go shopping or whether or not your friends want you go go to the store with them, if you can’t actually go to the store then you won’t.

Question 21

How did Vallone, Ross, & Lepper (1985) demonstrate the influence of attitudes on our encoding and interpretation of events using news reports?

Answer 21

In this experiments, students came in—who were either pro-Israel or pro-Palestine—and watch edthe same series of neutral news clips. The researchers found that participants felt that the news reports were biased in the favour of the opposing position to themselves. Even completely neutral coverage can be perceived as hostile. This is because if you believe that your beliefs are reality, we’ll still see neutral information as being biased because it’s not aligned with our own realities. But we still perceive the opposing side as being even more biased.

Question 22

How does context and culture influence your identity?

Answer 22

People in more individualist cultures tend to focus on more trait-orientated descriptions (e.g. funny, friendly, smart, etc.) whereas people in more socialist societies will tend to describe themselves using roles (e.g. a daughter, a student, a vegetarian, etc.). We also tend to stereotype ourselves (e.g. the geek, the princess, the one that’s always hungry, etc.).

Question 23

How do social influences shape who you are?

Answer 23

If you were asked, “how tall are you?” you have an objective scale to rely on. Whereas if someone asked you, “how popular are you?” then you most likely won’t be as sure. However, even in terms of height, you might perceive yourself differently if you were standing beside a group of midgets versus a group of basketball players.

Question 24

What is:

social comparison theory

Festinger (1954)

Answer 24

This theory says that people tend to evaluate their personal qualities by comparing themselves to others. Usually, it makes sense to make comparisons with similar others, since this will be the most informative. We will make diagnostic comparisons. For example, if you’re wondering how good you are at basketball, you probably won’t compare yourself to either Lebron James or a 3-year-old. You’ll compare yourself to regular people from your age group.

Question 25

What is the:

self-evaluation maintenance model

Tesser (1988)

Answer 25

The impact of comparison depends on: the closeness of the other person (e.g. whether it’s a friend or a celebrity) and the importance of the attribute (e.g. your ability to play football versus performance in one of your classes).

Question 26

What are upward comparisons and downward comparisons?

Answer 26

We either engage in upward comparisons, comparing oneself to people who are better off, or downward comparisons, comparing oneself to people who are worse off. In general, we assume that with upward comparisons we’ll feel worse and in downward comparisons we’ll feel better.

Question 27

What is the:

second-place effect

Answer 27

When the person who gets second place usually feels worse than people who win third place. This is because it’s most salient for the person in third place to make a downward comparison. They’re just happy to be on the podium. But for the second place person, it’s most salient to make an upwards comparison because they were “so close” to winning.

Question 28

How did Lockwood and Kunda (1997) demonstrate the second-place effect using their study titled “Superstars and Me”?

Answer 28

• Subjects came into the lab and either read a newspaper article about a superstar student who was graduating, or did not (control). Subjects were either freshmen (for whom success was attainable) or seniors (for whom such success was much less attainable). The superstar students were matched based on gender.
• As predicted, the freshmen were able to make a positive upward comparison because they have this role model. But the seniors rated themselves as lower because there was nothing they can do now.
• Importantly, the target has to be perceived as a relevant comparison to have an effect, thus the “superstar student” had to be in the same academic program as the students themselves. Upward comparisons can inspire and increase self-evaluation if the successes of these targets are both relevant and attainable.