Attitudes and Attitude

Change
Social Psychology
Lecture 3
Dr Amanda Rivis
Learning Outcomes

By the end of this lecture, and with

independent study, you should be able
to:
 Discuss the origins, structure and functions
of attitudes
 Evaluate methods for measuring attitudes
 Discuss the link between attitudes and
behaviour
 Discuss theories of attitude change
 The different origins of Attitudes:
Classical Conditioning
(A)
Stimulus 1
(Moth Balls)

Stimulus 2 Pleasurable
(Visits to Grandmother) Feelings

(B) Stimulus 1 Pleasurable

(Moth Balls) Feelings
The Different Origins of Attitudes:
Instrumental Conditioning

Behaviour toward Positive or Negative

Attitude Object Reinforcement Positive or Negative
(e.g., playing with (+ive = parents approval Attitude Toward
child of another -Ive = parents’ Attitude Object
Race) Disapproval)
The Different Origins of Attitudes:
Imitation

Social Learning Theory (Bandura 1977):

 Attitudesare learned through imitation

and modelling. Parents and society
influence attitude
Attitude Structure
 Three-component model views attitudes as
having three components:
 Affective = feelings about the attitude
object
 Behavioural = predisposition to act towards
the attitude object in a certain way
 Cognitive = beliefs about the attitude object

 Any given attitude may be based in lesser or

greater amounts on any of these components
Functions of Attitudes
 Value-Expressive function
 enable us to express who we are and what we
believe in
 Ego-defensive function
 enable us to project internally-held conflicts
onto others (e.g., homophobia)
 Knowledge function
 enable us to know the world
 Utilitarian Function
 Enable us to gain rewards and avoid
punishment
How are attitudes measured?
Overt Attitude Measures
Self-report (single-item) attitude measures
 Advantages:
 Easy and quick to administer
 Relatively cheap
 Disadvantages:
 Responses may not be reliable, e.g.,
 Question wording
 Mood
 Social desirability (but see bogus pipeline technique)
 Assume people have an attitude! (cf.
“spontaneous” attitudes)
How are attitudes measured?
Overt Attitude Measures
Attitude scales
 Multiple items are used to measure the same
construct
 Eliminate some of the problems of single-item
measures (e.g., reliability)
 Some of the more popular scales include:
 Likert scale

 Osgood’s Semantic Differential Scale

 Expectancy-Value Scale (Fishbein, 1971)

How are attitudes measured?
Example of Expectancy-Value Approach
My using birth Belief Outcome Product
control pills… Strength Evaluations
Is convenient +3 +1 +3
Causes me to gain +3 -2 -6
weight
Gives me guilt +2 -1 -2
feelings
Enables me to
regulate the size of +2 +2 +4
my family
Total -1
How are attitudes measured?
Covert Measures
 Covert Attitude Measures (CAM). These
measures use physiological arousal to
infer attitudes:
 Electro-myograph (EMG). (Petty &
Cacioppo 1981) which may include heart
rate & pupil dilation
 Galvanic Skin Response (GSR) :
measures physiological arousal detected
through skin resistance (Porier & Lott
1967)
How are attitudes measured?
Evaluation of Covert Measures

More objective than self-report

measures

Physiological measures (e.g. GSR) can be

caused by fear or anger

Physiological measures cannot assess

the direction of affective responses
How Well Do Attitudes Predict
Behaviour?
 Early research evidence suggested a weak to
moderate link between attitudes and behaviour
(e.g., LaPiere, 1934; Wicker, 1969)

 More recent research has examined

moderators of the attitude-behaviour
relationship, e.g.,
 Attitude strength
 Direct experience with the attitude object

 Attitudinal ambivalence

 Correspondence of attitudinal and behavioural

measures
 How Well Do Attitudes Predict Behaviour?
Correspondence of Attitudinal and Behavioural
Measures

Attitude Measure Attitude-Behaviour

Correlation
Attitude toward birth control .08

Attitude toward birth control pills .32

Attitude toward using birth control pills .53

Attitude toward using birth control pills .57

during the next two years

Source: Davidson & Jaccard (1979)

How Well Do Attitudes Predict
Behaviour: Ajzen’s (1991) Theory of
Planned Behaviour (TPB)
 This model posits an important mediator of
the attitude-behaviour link, namely
behavioural ‘intention’

 The TPB holds that attitudes combine with

other important factors in predicting
intentions and, in turn, behaviour:-
 Perceived social pressure
 Factors that may facilitate or inhibit
performance of the behaviour
Theory of Planned Behaviour (Ajzen,
1991)

Perceived
Social
Pressure

Attitudes Intention Behaviour

Perceived
Behavioural
Control
Theories of Attitude Change: The Yale
Attitude Change Approach (Hovland, et al.
1953)

According to this approach, attitude

change/persuasion influenced by 3
factors:-
 Source – originator of communication
 Message – features of communication itself
 Audience – characteristics of who is receiving
the message
Theories of Attitude Change: The Yale
Attitude Change Approach (Hovland, et al.
1953)
 Characteristics of Source
 Credibility
 Expertise
 Trustworthiness

 Attractiveness
 Similarity
 Appearance
Theories of Attitude Change: The Yale
Attitude Change Approach (Hovland, et al.
1953)

 Message Factors
 One-sided vs. Two-sided messages

 Order of messages
 Primacy Effects –v-
 Recency Effects

 Repetition
Theories of Attitude Change: The Yale
Attitude Change Approach (Hovland, et al.
1953)
 Characteristics of Audience
 Distraction

 Intelligence

 Self-Esteem (?)
 Age (18-25 year olds most susceptible)

Problem: what conditions determine the

relative importance of these factors?
Petty & Cacioppo’s (1986) Elaboration
Likelihood (dual-process) Model of
Persuasion (ELM)
 ELM holds that there are two ‘routes’ to
attitude change:
 Central route to persuasion occurs when we
think critically about message content and
are swayed by the strength and quality of
its arguments.
 Peripheral route to persuasion occurs when
we do not do much thinking but are swayed
by employing heuristics on the basis of non-
content cues (e.g., “experts know best”)
The Elaboration-Likelihood Model of
Persuasion (Petty & Cacioppo, 1986)

Whether persuasion results from the

central or the peripheral processing
route depends upon:
 Ability
 e.g., attention, ‘receptive’

 Motivation
 Personal Involvement
The Elaboration-Likelihood Model of
Persuasion (Petty & Cacioppo, 1986)

Central Route to
Yes
Persuasion

Persuasive Ability & Motivation Attitude Change

Communication to pay attention?

Peripheral Route
No To persuasion
Theories of Attitude Change: Cognitive
Dissonance Theory (Festinger, 1957)
This theory of self-persuasion holds that:
 Cognitive
inconsistency creates a state of
psychological tension (i.e., “dissonance”)

 Suchtension is aversive and motivating

(where it poses a threat to the self)

 Easiest
form of dissonance reduction will be
adopted
Cognitive Dissonance Theory and Attitude
Change: Justifying Attitude-Discrepant
Behaviour
25
Rating of task enjoyment

20

15

10

0
No lie $20 lie $1 lie
Festinger & Carlsmith (1959)
Theories of Attitude Change: Bem’s
(1965) Self Perception Theory

 According to Bem, attitude change does not

need to result from dissonance

 People infer their attitudes from their

behaviour

 Cognitive dissonance when attitude-behaviour

discrepancy large self-perception when not so
large (Fazio, et al. 1977)
Reading
 Hogg, M. & Vaughan, G. (2005) Social Psychology (4th
Edition) Prentice Hall: London - chapter 5

 Brehm, S, Kassin, S. & Fein, S. (2002) Social

Psychology. Houghton Mifflin: London - Chapter 6

 Aronson, E., Wilson, T., & Akert, R. (2005) Social

psychology (5th Edition) - chapter 7

 Morgan, C, King, R. & Robinson, N. (1979) Introduction

to Psychology. McGrw-Hill: London- Chapter 14