CHAPTER 5 - ATTITUDES
I.
II.
HISTORY
A.
WWII
- propaganda & persuasion
B.
Current
- politics
- advertisers
DEFINITION
Attitude = person s predisposition or orientation toward some object.
Includes:
1) whether we like something
2) how we are likely to behave in response to that something
3) what we know about that something
ABCs of attitudes = affect, behavior, & cognition
III.
ATTITUDE FORMATION
A.
Learning processes
1.
Classical (Pavlovian) Conditioning
- US -> UR
- CS -> CR
EX
Staats & Staats
Nationality Study
- words paired with nationalities
1 nationality & pleasant word
1 nationality & unpleasant word
IV:
Dutch/positive, Swedish/negative or Dutch/negative, Swedish/positive
Un/pleasant words = US -> reaction
Nationality = CS -> neutral reaction
Results: Ss more positive toward nationality paired with positive
B.
2.
Operant (Skinnerian) Conditioning
- effects of reward & punishment on behavior/beliefs
3.
Observational Learning (Bandura)
- people imitate models
Personality processes
- attitudes can be formed to serve conscious/unconscious needs
EX
C.
Herek (1987)
attitudes towards gays & lesbians
- ego-defensive attitudes
Logical inference processes
1.
Influence of beliefs upon attitudes
- beliefs = cognitive information
- can influence our attitudes
Consistency in beliefs & attitudes
- Heider s Balance Theory
1
---Strongly
Disagree
2
---
3
--Neutral
4
---
5
Strongly
Agree
2.
Influence of behaviors on attitudes
Festinger s (1957) Cognitive Dissonance Theory
- What we DO can influence what we BELIEVE
Inconsistency -> unpleasant state of arousal (cognitive dissonance)
-> actions/thought to reduce this state of tension
Drive state (Drive Reduction Theory)
- motivated to satisfy a drive/need
- to achieve psychological consistency
To reduce dissonance
1.
Add more consonant cognitions
2.
Change the dissonant element to be more consonant
- changing attitudes is easiest
EX
Sherman & Gorkin Riddle Study
- gave Ss a riddle to solve
- measured Ss sexist/nonsexist attitudes
- dissonance for nonsexist Ss who don t get riddle
Low Sexist
no problem
dissonance
Get riddle
Don t get riddle
High Sexist
no problem
no dissonance
- Ss read about sex discrimination case
Results:
Dissonance group awarded more money to complainant
1 paradigm = choice studies
EX
Brehm s Consumer Products
2nd paradigm Insufficient Justification
EX
Counterattitudinal essays
EX
IV:
Festinger & Carlsmith $1/$20
- Ss perform boring task
- experiment is over
- appeal to S for help
Offered $1 or $20 for telling next S that experiment is exciting
- unrelated experimenter surveyed Ss attitudes
Results:
$20 reduces dissonance
- external justification
$1 = insufficient justification
-> change attitude to reduce dissonance
EX
Aronson & Mills Initiation Study
- Female Ss recruited for ongoing discussion groups about sex
- initiation
IV:
1) Control group = admitted to group
2) Mild initiation = read aloud sexual words
3) Severe initiation = recite aloud (to male) obscene words
& sexual passages
- all Ss heard boring discussion
DV:
Ss rated how interesting the discussion group was
Results:
Control & mild groups
- said it was truly boring
Severe initiation group
- lots of dissonance
- ratings were much higher
***** Fundamental social psych principle: we value that which is hard to obtain
Bem s Self-Perception Theory
- CDT requires hypothetical internal process
Bem: infer our attitudes simply by observing our behavior
- even in absence of tension
EX
Chaiken & Baldwin - Ecology Study
- questionnaire re ecology attitudes
IV:
½ Ss would appear pro-ecology
½ Ss would appear anti-ecology
DV:
Results:
Ss rated environmental attitudes
- Ss induced to rate attitudes as pro-ecology rated selves as
more pro-environment
BUT only for Ss with weak attitudes
CDT vs. SPT = motivational state
CDT: dissonance arouses unpleasant tension person is motivated to reduce
SPT: no tension, just cool observation
CDT applies to behaviors that violate attitudes important to person
- that leads to tension
SPT applies when attitudes are weak, uncertain, or less important
- tension is not necessary to create attitude change
IV.
ATTITUDE FUNCTIONS
Katz (1960) - attitudes resist change
A.
Instrumental function
- attitudes help obtain rewards & avoid punishments
B.
Ego-defensive function
- attitudes resolve personality conflicts & guard against anxiety
C.
Knowledge function
- attitudes create cohesive & comprehensible world
D.
Value-expressive function
- attitudes express underlying values
EX
Herek
Results:
Attitudes toward Gays
- analyzed content of essays to determine functions attitudes serve
3 different functions
- knowledge/instrumental
- ego-defensive
- value-expressive
64% of essays = 1 function
34% = 2+ functions
an attitude can serve > 1 function
V.
ATTITUDES & BEHAVIORS
Do people behave in a manner consistent with their attitudes?
- prediction of 1-to-1 correspondence
Wicker (1969) review
- attitudes correlated very little with behavior (.30)
EX
La Piere (1934)
- attitudes & behavior toward Asians
- virtually unrelated
La Piere traveled U.S. with Chinese couple
- stopped at motels/restaurants
- treated well
- got 128 responses to questionnaire
Wicker s conclusion
-> why bother changing attitudes: won t change behavior
Changed the question
- WHEN are attitudes related to behavior
- under WHAT circumstances
This document was created with Win2PDF available at http://www.daneprairie.com.
The unregistered version of Win2PDF is for evaluation or non-commercial use only.