behavior and attitudes ch4

8/6/2019 Behavior and Attitudes CH4

1/34

Social Psychology

Behaviors and Attitudes- Chapter 4


2/34

What is an Attitude?

Feelings toward some object, person, or idea.

Reflect underlying differences in the extent to whichwe feel positive or negative (or both) about anattitude object.

Thus, attitudes reflect a positive, negative, or mixedevaluation of a person, object, or idea expressed atsome level of intensity.


3/34

Conceptualizing Attitudes:

4 Possible Reactions to Attitude Objects

Cacciopo, et al. 1997


4/34

How Attitudes Are Measured:

Self-Report Measures

Attitude Scale: A multiple-item questionnaire

designed to measure a persons attitude toward

some object. e.g., Likert Scale

Bogus Pipeline: A phony lie-detector device that

is sometimes used to get respondents to give

truthful answers to sensitive questions.

Sigall & Page (1971)- Acknowledging Prejudice


5/34

How Attitudes Are Measured:

Covert Measures

Observable behavior

Facial Electromyograph (EMG): An

electronic instrument that records facial

muscle activity associated with emotions

and attitudes.

Implicit attitudes (IAT)


6/34

The Facial EMG: A Covert Measure of

Attitudes?

From Cacioppo, J .T., and Petty, R.E. (1981). E lectromyograms as measures of extent and affectivity of information

processing. American Psychologist, 36, 441-456. Copyright 1981 by the American Psychological Association.

Reprinted with permission.


7/34

How Attitudes Are Measured: The

Implicit Association Test (IAT)

Based on notion that we have implicit attitudes (non-conscious attitudes that we may be unaware of).

Implicit Association Test (IAT): Measures the speedwith which one responds to pairings of concepts(Black-Bad/White-Good vs. Black-Good/White-Bad). Average correlation between IAT scores and explicit self-

reported attitudes r= .24 (Hoffman, et al., 2005)

IAT website: www.yale.edu/implicit, dates back to 1998,over 2.5 million tests administered.

Studies have yielded an average implicit preference for (1)self over other, (2) white over black, (3) young over old, (4)and the stereotype that links males with careers and femaleswith family (Greenwald et al., 2003)


8/34

The Link Between Attitudes

and Behavior:

Consistency or Inconsistency?

Is the assumption that attitudes influencebehavior a valid one?

Historically, social psychology wrestled withthe paradox that peoples attitudes did not tendto accurately predict their behaviors.

LaPieres (1934) provocative but flawed study.Wickers (1969) conclusion that attitudes and

behavior are only weakly correlated.

The SituationistChallenge


9/34

Attitudes and Behavioral Links


10/34

The Link Between Attitudes & Behavior:

Putting Attitudes in Context

Why do such disparities exist between peoples attitudes andtheir behaviors?

Across > 100 studies, Ajzen and Fishbeins (1977) found thatattitudes correlate with behavior only when attitude measuresclosely match the behavior in question.

General vs. Specific attitudes/behaviors- General attitudes tendto poorly predict specific behaviors, but that specific attitudes

predict well specific behaviors Davidson & Jaccard (1979): Predicting birth control usage within thenext 2 yrs was better predicted by specific attitudes (How do you feelabout using birth control pills during the next 2 yrs.) rather thangeneral ones (How do you feel about birth control?).


11/34

W

hen Do Attitudes Predict Behavior?

Minimizing socialinfluences on expressedattitudes

Minimizing other specificsituational influences on

behavior (Theprinciple of

aggr

egation) Examining attitudesspecific to the behavior

When attitudes arepotentorstrong(i.e., salient)

Prettyman/ PhotoEdit


12/34

Strength of the Attitude

Why do some attitudes have more influence

on behavior?

Depends on attitudes importance or strength.

Why are some attitudes stronger than

others?

Because of our genetic make-up?


13/34

Genetic Influences on Attitudes

(Olson et al., 2001., N = 672)


14/34

Theory of Reasoned Action (Fishbein, 1980) &

The Theory of Planned Behavior (Ajzen, 1991)

Proposes that attitudes influence our behavior through a rationalprocess of deliberate decision making. The decision to or not to enact a particular behavior is understood in

terms of ourbehavioral intentions.

Behavioral intentions are often strong predictors of how we act in agiven situation (Ajzen, 1987).

Several factors influence ones behavioral intentions

(1) attitudes toward a specific behavior(positive or negative

evaluations of performing the act/whether it will yield positive ornegative consequences)

(2) subjective norms (perceptions of others approval or disapprovalof the act)

(3)perceived control(appraisals of ones ability to perform the act)


15/34

Theory of Planned Behavior

(Ajzen, 1991)

Reprinted from Organizational Behaviorand Human Decision Processes, Vol. 50, ProfessorAjzen,

pp. 179-211. Copyright (c) 1991, with permission from Elsevier.


16/34

Theory of Planned Behavior Application:

Does attitudes about Ecstasy predict its usage?(Orbell, Blair, Sherlock, & Conner, 2001)

Young people were approached in various locations and asked tocomplete a questionnaire designed to assess theirAttitudes Toward Ecstasy (e.g., is the drug enjoyable-unenjoyable,

pleasant-unpleasant, beneficial-harmful, etc.)

Subjective Norms (whether their friends would approve of their usingEcstasy)

Perceived Control(1. whether they could obtain it, 2. whether theycould resist taking it if they had it)

Behavioral Intention (whether they planned on using Ecstasy withinthe next 2 months)

Intentions To andActual Ecstasy Use were significantly predictedby a positive attitude toward Ecstasy, seeing its use as normativelyaccepted by ones peers, and perceived control over using it.

Intentions to use ecstasy significantly predictedActual ecstasy use


17/34

The Link Between Behaviors and Attitudes (B A)

Self-Persuasion Effects

Do changes in our behaviors produce changes inattitude?

Various evidence supports the contention that ourbehaviors come to alter our attitudes.

Role Playing (Zimbardo, 1971) The foot-in-the-door phenomena (Cialdini)

Several theories suggest that our behaviors candetermine our attitudes

Cognitive Dissonance Theory Self-Perception Theory

Self-Affirmation Theory


18/34

Does Behavior Determine Attitudes?

Role playing (Zimbardo,

1971)

Phil Zimbardo


19/34

Cognitive Dissonance Theory:(Leon Festinger (1957)

We are motivated by a desire for cognitive consistency

We experience psychological tension- (i.e., a state of negative

arousal, dissonance) when we are aware of inconsistencies

among our attitudes, cognitions, and behaviors.

e.g., saying things you dont believe you look great in that outfit ,

deciding among two attractive options (who to date, what to major in)

We become highly motivated to reduce dissonance and often doso by adjusting their thinking which often often involves

irrational or sometimes maladaptive behavior.


20/34

Ways to Reduce Dissonance:

Embracing your chocolate mousse option despite that

Youre Dieting


21/34

A Dissonance Classic:

Festinger & Carlsmiths (1959) Boring Task Study

Would a counterattitudinal actionproduce

changes in how participants really feel?

Would being paid $1 or $20 to tell others that a

boring task was actually interesting alter how

enjoyable the participants found the boring task?


22/34

A Dissonance Classic:

Festinger & Carlsmiths (1959) Boring Task Study

From "Cognitive Consequences of Forced Compliance," by L. Festinger and J.M. Carlsmith (1959), Journal of

Abnormal and Social Psychology, 58, 203.210. Reprinted with permission.


23/34

Dissonance & Insufficient Justification


24/34

Festinger & Carlsmiths study:

Participants experienced cognitive dissonance

because they had insufficient justification for

lying (i.e., saying the study was exciting when it

was actually boring).

Contributions of Festinger & Carlsmiths study:

Showed the phenomenon ofself-persuasion. Contradicted the behaviorists widely accepted belief

that big rewards produce greater change.


25/34

Why Do Actions Affect Attitudes?

A Cognitive Dissonance Theory Perspective

Insufficient Justification (e.g., Festinger & Carlsmith Study) Dissonance produced from counterattitudinal actions.

Post Decisional Self-Justification Effects Dissonance produced from making decisions results in

justifying our behaviors.

e.g., Knox & Inkster (1968)- In contrast to those bettors whowere still waiting in line to bet, racetrack bettors who had justfinished placing their bets were more prone to believe thattheir horse would win.


26/34

Justifying Difficult Decisions:When

Good Choices Get Even Better

Whenever we make difficult decisions, we

feel dissonance.

We rationalize the correctness of our

decision by exaggerating:

The positive features of the chosen alternative

The negative features of the unchosenalternative.


27/34

Other Applications:

Justifying Attitude-Discrepant Behavior

Mild punishment is insufficient deterrence

for attitude-discrepant nonbehavior.

The less severe the threatened punishment, the

greater the attitude change produced.


28/34

Alternative Routes to Self-Persuasion

Self-Perception Theory (Bem, 1972): Self-persuasionthrough observation of own behavior (i.e., inferring ourattitudes based on attribution processes). Especially prone to occur when our attitudes are weak or

ambiguous.

Impression Management Theory:What matters is not amotive to be consistent but rather a motive to appearconsistent to others (i.e., self-presentation concerns toappear socially desirable).

Self-Affirmation Theory: Dissonance situations create athreat to the self which can be resolved by affirming orrevalidating ones integrity. The affirmation can occur in a non-dissonance related area!!!


29/34

Comparison of Cognitive Dissonance &

Self-Perception Theories


30/34

Applying Self-Perception Theory:

Overjustification Effects and Intrinsic Motivation


31/34

Necessary Conditions for the Arousal and

Reduction of Dissonance


32/34

Applying Self-Affirmation Theory(Galinsky, et al., 2000)

When would dissonant speeches (advocating bans on popular campustraditions) produce the strongest endorsement for the ban?

Self-Affirmation Conditions: Participants given a chance to express their

values after giving the speech.


33/34

Self-Concept Change Study

(Tice, 1992)W

ould participants sit closer or further away from the confederateafter portraying themselves as introverted or extraverted in either a

private or public setting?

130

135

140

145

150

155

160

165

170

Introvert Extravert

Private

Public


34/34

Critically Comparing the Theories of

Self-Persuasion

behavior and attitudes ch4

Documents