Defining Attitudes LaPiere (1934) Attitudes Attitude: - - PDF document

defining attitudes
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

Defining Attitudes LaPiere (1934) Attitudes Attitude: - - PDF document

Defining Attitudes LaPiere (1934) Attitudes Attitude: psychological tendency that is expressed by evaluating a particular entity expressed by evaluating a particular entity with some degree of favor or disfavor Chapter 5


slide-1
SLIDE 1

1

Attitudes

Southern Methodist University PSYC 3341 1

Chapter 5

Defining Attitudes

  • LaPiere (1934)
  • Attitude: psychological tendency that is

expressed by evaluating a particular entity

Southern Methodist University PSYC 3341 2

expressed by evaluating a particular entity with some degree of favor or disfavor

– Basically, an internal evaluation – Attitude object is what is evaluated

ABC’s of Attitudes

  • Affect

– Physiological or emotional component – How you feel about it

Southern Methodist University PSYC 3341 3

  • Behavior

– Responses or actions influenced by the attitude

  • Cognition

– The thoughts about the object – What you think about it

Attitude Formation

  • Classical conditioning
  • Operant conditioning
  • Observational learning

Southern Methodist University PSYC 3341 4

  • Observational learning
  • Direct socialization
  • Heredity

Attitude Strength

  • Commitment
  • Embededness

Southern Methodist University PSYC 3341 5

Fishbein & Ajzen (1975)

1. Start with single belief 2. That belief is evaluated 3 Add other beliefs and evaluations

Southern Methodist University PSYC 3341 6

3. Add other beliefs and evaluations 4. Form attitude 5. Form a set of intentions 6. Look at a single behavior 7. Look at a set of behaviors

slide-2
SLIDE 2

2

Southern Methodist University PSYC 3341 7

Fishbein & Ajzen

  • Principle of correspondence

1. An attitude should be consistent with a set of beliefs, not necessarily any single belief. 2 An attitude should be consistent with a set of intentions

Southern Methodist University PSYC 3341 8

2. An attitude should be consistent with a set of intentions, not necessarily any single intention. 3. People generally do what they intend to do. 4. An attitude should be consistent with a set of behaviors, not necessarily any single behavior.

  • Attitudes predict behavior at corresponding levels
  • f specificity

Measuring Attitudes

Southern Methodist University PSYC 3341 9

Measuring Attitudes

  • Jones & Sigall (1971)

– Bogus Pipeline

  • Physiological measures

Southern Methodist University PSYC 3341 10

Physiological measures

– GSR (Galvanic skin response) – Pupillary response – Self report of affect – Facial electromyographic activity

Measuring Attitudes

  • Standard self-report measures

– Bogardus’ Social Distance scale – Error-choice method

Southern Methodist University PSYC 3341 11

Error choice method – Semantic differential – Likert-type scale

Connecting Attitudes and Behavior

  • Salience

– Priming

  • Strengthen attitudes

Southern Methodist University PSYC 3341 12

Strengthen attitudes

  • Form intentions
  • Create a plan to carry out action
slide-3
SLIDE 3

3

Inferring attitudes from behavior

  • Role playing

– Zimbardo’s prison experiment

  • Cognitive consistency theories

Southern Methodist University PSYC 3341 13

Cognitive consistency theories

– Balance theory – Impression management

  • Self monitoring

Inferring attitudes from behavior

  • Cognitive consistency (cont’d)

– Cognitive dissonance

  • Inconsistency causes arousal

Southern Methodist University PSYC 3341 14

  • There is a drive to reduce that arousal
  • Attitudes change to reduce arousal

– Selective Perception

  • Selective exposure
  • Selective attention
  • Selective interpretation

Inferring attitudes from behavior

  • Bem’s Self-perception theory

– We infer our attitudes from our behavior – Motivation

Southern Methodist University PSYC 3341 15

Motivation

  • Intrinsic
  • Extrinsic

– Affect-as-information concept

Southern Methodist University PSYC 3341 16

Persuasion (Attitude Change)

Southern Methodist University PSYC 3341 17

History

  • Early contradictions
  • Possible explanation
  • Distraction effect

Southern Methodist University PSYC 3341 18

  • Distraction effect
  • Cognitive elaboration theories

– “self-talk” – Petty & Cacioppo’s ELM

  • Elaboration Likelihood Model
slide-4
SLIDE 4

4

ELM

  • Description of the model
  • Other factors that affect persuasion within

the model

Southern Methodist University PSYC 3341 19

the model

– Source Factors – Message Factors – Channel Factors – Recipient Factors

Source Factors

  • Credibility

– Sleeper effect – Perceived trustworthiness

Southern Methodist University PSYC 3341 20

Perceived trustworthiness – Perceived Expertise

  • Attractiveness

– Halo effect

Message Factors

  • One sided vs. two sided
  • Reason vs. Emotion
  • Fear

Southern Methodist University PSYC 3341 21

  • Fear

Channel Factors

  • Face to face
  • Video
  • Text

Southern Methodist University PSYC 3341 22

  • Text

Recipient Factors

  • Mood
  • Age

Southern Methodist University PSYC 3341 23

Cult Indoctrination

  • Characterized by:

– Rituals of devotion – Isolation from surrounding “evil” culture

Southern Methodist University PSYC 3341 24

– Charismatic leader

  • Indoctrination

– Attitudes follow behavior – Persuasive elements – Group effects

  • Social implosion
slide-5
SLIDE 5

5

Resisting Persuasion

  • Attitude inoculation

– Strengthen personal commitment – Mildly challenge beliefs

Southern Methodist University PSYC 3341 25

Mildly challenge beliefs

  • Leads to counterarguments