LECTURE 5
Attitudes and Behaviour
1) Administration
2) What are attitudes?
3) Origin of attitudes
4) How do we measure attitudes?
 Explicit versus implicit measures
 IAT – how did you do?
 IAT video
5) Break
6) The attitude-behaviour link
 Do attitudes determine behaviour?
 Does behaviour determine attitudes?
7) Next Class
Seneca Rehabilitation Program
• Great program for students - with over a 90% employment
rate directly out of the program.
• Applications are due on March 9 for 3rd-year honours
students or 2nd-year students completing a 90-credit degree.
• Video presentation at the following link:
http://psyc.info.yorku.ca/york-seneca-rehabilitation-servicescertificate-program/information-session-york-senecarehabilitation-services-certificate-program/
Questions?
Attitudes
Definition:
“An evaluation of a person, object, or idea”
Attitudes Towards:
(Likert Scale)
• Ice-cream
Very
negative
1
2
3
4
5
6
Very
positive
7
6
Very
positive
7
6
Very
positive
7
• Asians
Very
negative
1
2
3
4
5
• voting
Very
negative
1
2
3
4
5
Attitudes towards:
(Likert Scale)
• I believe that nudity on tv is wrong.
Strongly
Disagree
1
2
3
4
5
6
Strongly
Agree
7
• Homelessness in Canada is a serious social problem that needs attention.
Strongly
Disagree
1
2
3
4
5
6
Strongly
Agree
7
• I believe that a family with a mother and father is the best.
Strongly
Disagree
1
2
3
4
5
6
Strongly
Agree
7
Where do attitudes come from?
(C) Cognitively Based Attitudes
• Based primarily on a person’s beliefs about the properties of an attitude object.
“I like this vacuum cleaner because this one picks up more dirt”
(A) Affectively Based Attitudes
• Based primarily on people’s feelings and values pertaining to the attitude object
• Can be a sensory reaction (chocolate), conditioned (love warm comforters on rainy
days), or value-based (anti-abortion)
(B) Behaviourally Based Attitudes
• Based on an observation of how one behaves toward an attitude object
“I recycled, so I must have a positive attitude toward environmental issues”
Sometimes we might be ambivalent toward certain objects because of these different
determinants (cigarettes).
ABCs of attitudes
How do we measure attitudes?
Explicit vs. Implicit Measires
Why is this distinction important?
Explicit Measures
•
•
•
•
Likert Scales (already shown)
Evaluation Thermometer
Semantic Differential Scale
Modern Prejudice
Attitudes Towards:
(Likert Scale)
• Gay men
Very
negative
1
2
3
4
5
6
Very
positive
7
Evaluation Thermometer
Gay Men
Very favorable
100
50
0
Very unfavorable
Semantic Differential Scale
Gay Men
Bad ____ : ____ : ____ : ____ : ____ Good
Worthless ____ : ____ : ____ : ____ : ____ Valuable
Unpleasant ____ : ____ : ____ : ____ : ____ Pleasant
Boring ____ : ____ : ____ : ____ : ____ Interesting
Unfavorable ____ : ____ : ____ : ____ : ____ Favorable
Harmful ____ : ____ : ____ : ____ : ____ Beneficial
Modern Prejudice Scale
strongly
disagree
1
2
3
4
5
6
strongly
agree
7
1. Gay men are getting too demanding in their push for
equal rights.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
2. Prejudice against gay men is still a problem.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
3. The government should not help make any special effort to
help gay men because they should help themselves.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
How do we measure attitudes?
Implicit Measures
• Bogus Pipelines
• Reaction Time Measures - IAT
• Physiological Measures – EEG and fMRI (brain
activity), ECG (heart rate)
Bogus Pipeline Studies
Page & Sigall (1971)
A bogus pipeline fools people into disclosing their attitudes by convincing
them that a machine can be used to gauge their private attitudes.
Participants hold a wheel that measures whether they agree with a statement
or not. Electrodes are attached to their arm and the fake machine supposedly
gauges their tendency to turn the wheel to the left (disagree) or to the right
(agree). This attitude machine was demonstrated by showing participants
how it worked on an attitude that they had expressed earlier.
Once convinced that the machine worked, participants were asked about
their racial attitudes. Compared to control conditions, who were not on the
machine, these participants reported more negative attitudes toward Blacks.
But is it possible that we are not even
aware of our implicit attitudes?
The Implicit Association Task and studies using physiological measure
suggests that this may in some instances be the case.
Did you test your Hidden Biases/Attitudes with the IAT?
Which IAT did you do?
What were the results?
IAT BIAS
Your results suggest:
Strong automatic preference for *
Moderate automatic preference for *
Slight automatic preference for *
Little or no automatic preference *
Slight automatic preference for *
Moderate automatic preference for *
Strong automatic preference for *
BLACK/WHITE IAT
unpleasant
or
BLACKS
pleasant
or
WHITES
BLACK/WHITE IAT
unpleasant
or
BLACKS
pleasant
or
WHITES
love
BLACK/WHITE IAT
unpleasant
or
WHITES
pleasant
or
BLACKS
BLACK/WHITE IAT
unpleasant
or
WHITES
pleasant
or
BLACKS
war
BLACK/WHITE IAT
Your results suggest:
Strong automatic preference for Whites
Moderate automatic preference for Whites
Slight automatic preference for Whites
Little or no automatic preference
Slight automatic preference for Blacks
Moderate automatic preference for Blacks
Strong automatic preference for Blacks
BLACK/WHITE IAT
Percentage of Total Respondents on IAT website
Blacks/Whites IAT
Preference for Whites
70%
Little or no preference
17%
Preference for Blacks
12%
Implicit Association Test (IAT)
Greenwald, McGhee, & Schwartz (1998)
Explicit vs. Implicit Measures of Bias
IAT and Semantic Differential Scale
Blacks (/Whites)
Bad
____ : ____ : ____ : ____ : ____
Worthless ____ : ____ : ____ : ____ : ____
Unpleasant ____ : ____ : ____ : ____ : ____
Good
Valuable
Pleasant
Video: Dateline on IAT
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n5Q5FQfXZag
Implicit Association Test (IAT)
Greenwald, McGhee, & Schwartz (1998)
Positive Ingroup Evaluations:
Blacks vs. Whites
Video: A girl like me
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=17fEy0q6yqc
But can the IAT predict behaviour?
If so, what type of behaviour?
Explicit
Behaviour
Implicit
Behaviour
explicit attitudes predict
Yes
No
implicit attitudes predict
No
Yes
Questions?/Comments
The Attitude-Behaviour Link
Do attitudes determine behaviour?
The Attitude-Behaviour Link
Do attitudes determine behaviour?
What are the conditions under which attitudes predict
behaviour?
Attitudes can predict behaviour when:
1. we minimize social influence on attitudes
– Reduce social desirable responding (bogus pipeline,
implicit measures)
2. we match the level of specificity of attitudes and
behaviours
•
•
General attitudes predict behaviours in general
Specific attitudes predict specific behaviours
– The theory of planned behaviour
3. attitudes are strong
General attitudes predict behaviours in general
A general attitudes toward an object or a concept may
not predict any specific behavior but if we average
behaviours over many occasions, attitudes can predict
behaviour.
Principle of aggregation:
A person’s religious attitude may not predict whether
they go to church next weekend but it will predict the
total number of a wide array of religious behaviours over
time.
Specific attitudes predict specific behaviours.
A general attitude will often not predict a specific
behavior.
But when attitude measures are directly pertinent to the
situation they will predict behavior in that situation.
Theory of Planned Behavior
Ajzen & Fishbein, 1985
Specific
Attitude
(Subjective)
Norms
Behavioral
Control
Intentions
Behaviour
Theory of Planned Behavior
Problems with this theory:
- It is very rationale and deliberative.
- Intentions are not great predictors of behaviour.
- Behaviors are sometimes spontaneous and unintentional. For
example, habits are very nondeliberative actions and intentions
do not predict habits.
- This theory also does not take into account our implicit attitudes
and how our behavior can also be influenced by these
evaluations that are often quite different than our explicit
attitudes.
Strong attitudes predict behaviours
(not all attitudes are equal)
People with a strong attitude:
• Often have acquired more information about the attitude object
• Often are personally involved with the attitude object. It is
important to them.
• Often have had direct experience with an attitude object.
Strong attitudes are important because they are more
accessible. More accessible attitudes direct behaviour.
(e.g., I think we must protect the environment.)
Questions?
The Attitude-Behaviour Link
Do attitudes determine behaviour?
Sometimes.
Does behaviour determine attitudes?
Sometimes.
When and why?
Why and when do behaviours
change attitudes?
e.g., Donating money to foreign aid.
1. Self-Presentation (not actual attitude change)
2. Self-Justification - Cognitive Dissonance
3. Self-Perception
Self-Presentation
•
•
•
To appear consistent (and avoid appearing foolish), we
express attitudes that match our actions
Assumes conscious awareness of the discrepancy between
the real attitude and the presented attitude
Not genuine attitude change
(e.g., If I donate money to a relief charity, I may state that I am more
positive toward this charity if I am with women who saw me give money
than if I was with a different group of women who did not witness my
initial donation.)
Self-Justification: Cognitive Dissonance
• Real change that occurs within the self.
• Tension arises when we are aware of inconsistencies
in the self
– You realize that your behaviour doesn’t match your
attitude
• To reduce that tension we often change our attitudes
to fit the behaviour
(e.g., I would state that I am more positive toward this charity even if I
was with a different group of women who did not witness my initial
donation or if no one was around.)
Self-Justification: Cognitive Dissonance
When?
1) Insufficient Justification
2) Postdecisional Dissonance
Self-Justification: Cognitive Dissonance
1) Insufficient Justification
We change our attitudes to be more consistent with our
behaviours if we act in a certain way that is not consistent with
our attitudes and we have no strong justification for acting in
this way. If we do have a reasonable justification, we will not
change our attitudes.
Self-Justification: Cognitive Dissonance
Classic Study: Festinger & Carlsmith (1959)
Procedure:
Independent Variable:
Dissonance/Justification Manipulation
Dependent Variable:
How much do you like the task? (-5 to +5)
Self-Justification: Cognitive Dissonance
Classic Study: Festinger & Carlsmith (1959)
Task Enjoyment
1.5
1
0.5
0
-0.5
-1
Control (no dissonance)
$20 (low dissonance)
$1 (high dissonance)
Self-Justification: Cognitive Dissonance
2) Postdecisional Dissonance
People often reduce dissonance that is aroused after
making a decision by
- increasing their liking for the chosen item and
- decreasing their liking for the rejected item.
Post-decision Dissonance
Schultz, Leveille, & Lepper (1999)
Ask 13 year olds to rate the attractiveness of various posters.
Some children were allowed to choose between 2 posters they rated very
positively. After choosing, they rated the poster they rejected more negatively
than they had previously.
- Rejecting a positive objects produces dissonance. So you need to change your
attitude toward positive object that you reject.
Other children were allowed to choose between 2 posters they rated very
negatively. After choosing, they rated the poster they chose more positively than
they had previously.
- Choosing a negative object produces dissonance. So you need to change your
attitude toward negative object that chose. This effect was largest.
Arousal and Cognitive Dissonance
So when do we feel dissonance?
Dissonance and the pill (Cooper & Zanna, 1974)
Procedure
• Subjects were asked to write a counter-attitudinal
essay
– banning all speakers on campus
• Either an illusion of high choice or low choice
• Given a pill – told will be arousing, have no effect, or
be relaxing (really a placebo)
• Examine attitude change
Dissonance and the Pill
Dissonance and the pill (Cooper & Zanna, 1974)
14
Attitude Change
12
10
8
High Choice
6
Low Choice
4
2
0
Arousal
No effect
Purported Pill Effect
Relaxation
Self-Perception Theory
•
When unsure of our attitudes, we infer them by
observing our behaviour.
–
Just like we infer others’ attitudes from their behaviours,
we do the same with our own attitudes.
– Social Embodiment
– Overjustification Effect
Social Embodiment
Recent theorizing on embodiment suggest there is a close
relationship between bodily feedback and higher cognitions. They
assuming that actions and body movements can directly influence
our thoughts and attitudes.
For example, if we are evaluating cartoons when we holding a pen
with a mouth that grins rather than a circular mouth, we will find
the cartoons funnier.
Likewise, if we are evaluating Chinese ideographs when we are
pulling up on a table (upward flex) compared to when we are
pushing down on a table (downward extend), we will like the object
more.
The feedback from our body influences our attitudes.
Overjustification effect
“The result of paying people to do what they
already like doing,” may make the task less
intrinsically motivated and less likely to occur.
– This effect occurs when someone offers an unnecessary
reward beforehand in an effort to control behaviour.
Overjustification effect
Deci (1971)
Procedure
- Monitored participants who are initially
allowed to play with puzzles.
- ½ subjects paid to solve puzzles
- ½ not paid
- Next removed all rewards for the paid group.
- Monitored who continued to work on the puzzle
Amount of time played with puzzles
Overjustification effect
Deci (1971)
Paid Group
Unpaid Group
400
350
300
250
200
150
100
Baseline Beginning
Middle
End
Overjustification Effect
(Self-Perception Theory)
Getting paid for something you want to do. Getting paid for doing
puzzles when you like solving puzzles. No dissonance here – I like
solving puzzles and I am solving puzzles. My attitude and my
behaviour are consistent.
However, self-perceptions may lead people to believe that by
receiving an unnecessary reward for the behaviour they may not
really like the task so much - - that they are just doing it for the
money. They believe that the reason they are behaving like they are
is because of extrinsic rather than intrinsic motivations.
Underjustification Effect
(Cognitive Dissonance Theory)
Getting paid for something you don’t want to do. Getting paid to tell
someone that a task is fun when your real attitude is that it is a
boring task. Dissonance is that your behaviour and your attitudes are
not consistent.
Why am I telling this person it is a fun task when it is really boring – it
can’t be because of the money ($1), it wasn’t enough to make me act
that way, I must really like the task.
Questions?
Next Class
Class 6: Persuasion