C82SAD: Attitudes, persuasive communication, and attitude change

What is an Attitude?
Social psychology is the study of attitudes (Allport, 1935) Distinction between social psychologists use of the word attitude and the generally used term i.e. He has an attitude problem, Wow, shes got attitude Attitude is defined as tendencies to evaluate an entity [attitude object] into some degree of favour or disfavour, ordinarily expressed in cognitive, affective and behavioural responses (Eagly and Chaiken, 1993).

Attitude: Definitions
The concept of attitudes is probably the most distinctive and indispensable concept in contemporary American social psychology. No other term appears more frequently in the experimental and theoretical literature (Allport, 1935, p. 798) Attitudes are a mental and neural state of readiness, organised through experience, exerting a directive or dynamic influence upon the individual's response to all objects and situations with which it is related (Allport,1935, p. 810).

Attitude: Definitions
Attitudes involve associations between attitude objects and evaluations of these objects (Fazio, 1989) Attitudes are evaluations of various objects that are stored in memory (Judd et al., 1991) Attitude is a psychological tendency that is expressed by evaluation a particular entity with some degree of favour of disfavour ... Evaluating refers to all classes of evaluative responding, whether overt or covert, cognitive, affective or behavioural (Eagly & Chaiken,1993).

Component Theories of Attitude

Unitary model. Attitudes are a single positive or negative evaluation of an attitude object Dual model. A mental state of readiness and therefore guides some evaluation or response towards and object Tripartite model. Include feeling (affective), action (behavioural), and thought (cognitive) components ABC

Tripartite Model?
Attitude object: Beer
Cognitive Belief based e.g.
Beer kills my brain cells Beer helps me to relax Beer tastes good after a hard days work

Affective Emotion based e.g.

Harmful-Beneficial Relaxing-Stressful Tasty-Bitter

Behavioural Intention based e.g.

I will cut down on my beer drinking I intend to drink beer when Im stressed I plan to drink more beer after work

What are Attitudes Used for?

Attitudes serve as conscious and unconscious motives and have four functions (Katz, 1960): They assist in helping us make sense of our world and to organize the information we encounter (c.f. cognitive economy) (KNOWLEDGE FUNCTION) They help us make behave in socially acceptable ways to gain positive and avoid negative outcomes (UTILITARIAN/ADJUSTIVE FUNCTION) They act as a guide to behaviour in social situations and help us in self- and social- categorization (SOCIAL IDENTITY/VALUE-EXPRESSIVE FUNCTION) They allow use to preserve a positive sense of self (EGO-DEFENSIVE FUNCTION)

Attitude Formation
Behavioural theories Direct experience expectancy value model of attitudes mere exposure can influence attitudes Classical conditioning neutral stimuli paired with salient response results in an attitude Operant conditioning attitudes shaped by a reinforcement system of reward and punishment Observational learning modelling in vicarious experiences

Attitude Formation
Cognitive theories Information integration theory attitudes formed by averaging available information on a object Self-perception theory infer attitudes from own behaviour (Bem, 1960) Mood-as-information hypothesis Emotion (mood) provides basis of evaluation of attitudes objects Heuristic processing decision rules of thumb are used to make judgements and form mental shortcuts in memory Persuasion Attitudes formed on the basis of persuasive information

Attitude Formation
Sources Parents Infer attitudes from those most closest to you (c.f. Bandura, 1965) but strength of association ranges from strong (Jennings & Niemi, 1968) to very weak (Connell, 1972) Mass media Particularly television an important influence of attitude formation especially in children (e.g., Chaffee et al., 1977) and links between television advertisements and childrens attitude Atkin, 1980)

Common Sense: Attitudes and Behaviour

You cant stop parents feeding their kids what they are going to feed them, what you can do is try to create a situation where over time people realize that it isnt really any good for kids to be brought up on a poor dietIts a question of changing attitudes over time
Tony Blair speaking on BBC Breakfast Tuesday, 10th October 2006

Attitude-Behaviour Relationship
Of principle concern - if attitudes dont guide behaviour then their efficacy and utility as a construct is greatly reduced Classic study: LaPiere (1934) restaurateur's attitudes towards Asians in 1930s USA- questioned validity of the attitude-behaviour link Wicker (1969) attitudes were very weakly correlated with behaviour across 45 studies (average r =.15) Gregson and Stacey (1981) only a small positive correlation between attitudes and alcohol consumption Stimulated study into the personality, contextual, temporal and methodological influences on the attitude-behaviour relationship

Attitude-Behaviour Relationship
Reasons for lack of a relationship: Methodological Unreliability and low validity of attitude and/or behavioural measures Time between attitude and behavioural measure Modality Lack of compatibility/correspondence between attitude and behaviour Target, Action, Context and Time Recent evidence: e.g. Armitage and Conner (2001) strong indirect attitude-behaviour relationships within Theory of Planned Behaviour

Expectancy-Value Models of Attitude

Expectancy-value models Attitudes have two components:
Expectancy: Behaviour will result in a certain outcome (e.g., studying hard will gain me good grades) Value: Outcome is highly valued (e.g., getting good grades is important to me)

Each expectancy is multiplied by each value to produce attitude score e.g. i=1 Attitude = S (expectancyi x valuei)

The Theory of Reasoned Action

(Ajzen & Fishbein, 1980)
General orientation towards the behaviour good-bad,useful-useless,harmful-beneficial
Measure of actual behaviour

Attitudes
Stated volitional plans I plan/I intend.../ I expect...

Intentions

Behaviour

Subjective Norms

Evaluation of others evaluation my parents think,my teacher thinks

Where do Attitudes and Subjective Norms Come From?

Behavioural Beliefs X Outcome Evaluations Normative Beliefs X Motivation to Comply

Attitudes Intentions Subjective Norms Behaviour

Expectancy-value Models of Attitudes and Subjective Norms

Mans belief about woman using pill Mans belief about man using condom

Attribute

Strength of belief
0.90 X

Value of belief
+2

Resul t
= +1.80

Strength of belief
0.70 X

Value of belief
-1

Resul t
= -0.70

Reliability

Embarrasement

1.00

+2

= +2.00

0.80

-2

= -1.60

Side effects
Outcome

0.10

-1

= -0.10

1.00

+2

= +2.00

+3.70

-0.30

The Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB)

(Ajzen , 1989)
Attitudes Intentions Subjective Norms
Control Beliefs X Perceived Power

Behaviour

Perceived Control
Evaluation of capacities/barriers/abilities self-efficacy/easy-difficult

The Effect of Including Perceived Behavioural Control

0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 TRA TPB
Intentions: sleep

Behaviour: vitamins Intentions: vitamins Behaviour: sleep

Theory
Source:Madden, Ellen & Ajzen (1992)

Factors Affecting AttitudeIntention Relationship in TPB

Generality of attitude (Davidson & Jaccard, 1979) confirmed TACT Attitude accessibility (Doll & Ajzen, 1992) Attitude strength (Fazio et al., 1986) Social identity as a group member (selfidentity for a particular behaviour) affects intention-behaviour relationship (Terry & Hogg, 1996)

The role of norms and group identification in attitude-behaviour consistency

Students expressed a stronger intention to engage in regular exercise when they felt their attitudes towards exercise were normative of a student peer group with which they identified strongly.
Intention to engage in regular exercise (7-point scale)

6.0

Group identification:

Low

High
5.5

Source: based on data from Terry and Hogg (1996)

5.0

4.5

4.0

Low High Ingroup normativeness of own attitude

Protection Motivation Theory

Balancing perceived threat vs. capacity to cope with healthy behaviour
Cognitive processes

Intrinsic reward Extrinsic reward (Maladaptive)

Perceived vulnerability Perceived severity

Threat appraisal

Protection motivation

Response efficacy Self-efficacy

Perceived response-cost

Coping appraisal

(Adaptive)

Source: Floyd, Prentice-Dunn, Rogers (2000)

Measuring Attitudes
Thurstones (1928) equal appearing interval scale developed from 100s of items (questions) Likert (1932) scale 5- point scales with +ive and ive scoring Semantic differential scale (Osgood et al., 1957) uses word pairs Scalogram (Guttman, 1944) agreement with statements from single trait

Scale Value of Items on an 11-point Thurstone Equal-Intervals Scale

THURSTONE SCALE
Attitude towards Contraception How favourable Value on 11point scale Item

Least

1.3 3.6

Practising contraception should be punishable by law. Contraception is morally wrong in spite of possible benefits. Contraception has both advantages and disadvantages. Contraception is a legitimate health measure. Contraception is the only solution to many of our social problems. We should not only allow but enforce limitation on family size.

Neutral

5.4 7.6 9.6

Most

10.3

An Example of a Likert-Scale Item to Measure

Attitudes Towards Nuclear Power Plants

`I believe that nuclear power plants are one of the great dangers of industrial societies +2 +1 Strongly agree Moderately agree

0
-1 -2

Neutral or undecided
Moderately disagree Strongly disagree

A 7-Point Likert-Type Self-Rating Scale

Are you favour of having nuclear power plants in Britain?

1 STRONGLY APPROVE

4 NEUTRAL

7 STRONGLY DISAPPROVE

Rating The Concept of `Nuclear Power on a

7-Point Semantic Differential Scale
SEMANTIC DIFFERENTIAL SCALE Nuclear power

GOOD

BAD

STRONG

WEAK

FAST

SLOW

Attitude Accessibility Model

Fazio (1989, 1995) proposed the attitude accessibility model Attitude is automatically activated on presence of situational cues that have a strong effect on life outcomes Attitudes are most influential when they are relevant and important

Attitude object in memory

No link

Evaluation of attitude object

Attitude object in memory

Weak link

Evaluation of attitude object

Attitude object in memory

Strong link

Evaluation of attitude object

Fazios Automatic Activation Model

According to the attitude accessibility model (Fazio, 1989), attitude accessibility the ease with which attitudes can be retrieved from memory plays a key role in the attitude-behaviour link.
Source: Fazio (1989)

Presentation of attitude object (activation)

Strong attitude activated-retrieved from memory

Evaluation of attitude object and situation

Information processing and behaviour toward attitude object

Persuasive Communication
The Yale approach precursor and highly influential of persuasive communication Hovland and coworkers identified the features of persuasive communication
Message (content) Source or communicator Audience

Yale Approach to Persuasive Communication (Hovland et al., 1953)

Message Order of arguments One- vs two-sided arguments Type of appeal Explicit vs implicit conclusion Source Expertise Trustworthiness Likeability Status Race
Audience Persuasibility Initial position Intelligence Self-esteem Personality

Attention

Opinion change

Perception change

Comprehension Affect change

Acceptance
Action change

The Source or Communicator

Experts more persuasive (and credible) than non-experts (Hovland & Weiss, 1952) Popular and attractive communicators are most effective (Kiesler & Kiesler, 1969) People speaking more quickly are more effective than slow speakers (Miller et al., 1976), conveys expertise in subject matter.

Source Credibility
Final opinion (hours of sleep required)
8

Bochner & Insko (1996_

7.5 7 6.5 6 5.5
High credibility (Nobel prize winner)
Low credibility (YMCA instructor)

8 *0

7 1

6 2

5 3

4 4

3 5

2 6

1 7

0 8

Discrepancy from modal student opinion

* Hours of sleep advocated by source

The Message
Persuasion is more effective if the message is not perceived to be deliberately intending to manipulate opinions Persuasion is enhanced using evaluativelybiased language information vs. evaluation e.g. price, contents, offer etc. vs. value for money Can persuasion be enhanced using messages that arouse fear in the audience?

Fear Communication

There is now a danger that is a threat to us all. It is a deadly disease and there is no known cure. The virus can be passed during sexual intercourse with an infected person. Anyone can get it... If you ignore AIDS it could be the death of you. So don't die of ignorance

Does Fear Work?

Fear messages pervasive in advertising and communication But how fearful can a message become and still be effective?

Does Fear Work?

Early research suggested low-fear was optimal (e.g., dental hygiene, Janis & Feshbach, 1953) Leventhal et al. (1967) found high-fear message promoted greater willingness to stop smoking McGuire (1969) suggested an inverted-U hypothesis Messages with too little fear may not highlight the potential harm of the targeted act Very disturbing images may distract people from the message itself or may evoke an avoidance reaction (Keller & Block, 1995)

Does Fear Work?

Amount of attitude change High

Low
Increase in fear

High

McGuires (1969) Inverted-U hypothesis

Does Fear Work?

Recent fear appeals Department for transport advertisements
THINK! Teenager road campaign THINK! Drink driving campaign

Department of health anti-smoking campaigns

The Medium and the Message

5
Amount of opinion change

4 3 2 1 0 Easy Difficult Message difficulty Written Audiotape Videotape

Source: Eagly and Chaiken (1983)

The Audience
Self-esteem Hovland et al. suggested that people with low self-esteem were more susceptible to persuasion and attitude change McGuire (1968) suggested that this also followed an inverted-U relationship

The Audience
Gender effects Women more easily persuaded than men (Cooper, 1979; Eagly, 1978) Reasons suggested are:
Socialisation into cooperative roles (Eagly et al., 1981) Only when women less familiar with subject matter (Sistrunk & McDavid, 1971) Carli (1990) suggested that men more persuaded by tentative female communicator but women equally persuaded by both Covell et al. (1994) female participants found to prefer image-related marketing of tobacco and alcohol over quality- or attribute-oriented advertising

Dual Process Models of Persuasion

Elaboration-likelihood model (Petty & Cacioppo, 1986) Two routes to persuasion Central route = when message is followed closely, considerable cognitive effort expended Peripheral route = Superficial processing of peripheral cues, attraction rather than information

Elaboration-Likelihood Model (Petty & Cacioppo, 1986)

Information processing
CAREFUL

Elaboration
HIGH LEVEL

Route
CENTRAL

Attitude change
Depends on Quality of Arguments

Persuasive message LOW LEVEL PERIPHERAL NOT CAREFUL Depends on Presence of Persuasion cues

Dual Process Models of Persuasion

Heuristic-systematic model (Chaiken, 1987) Contrasts systematic and heuristic processing Systematic = careful, deliberative scanning and processing of available arguments/information Heuristic processing = people use cognitive heuristics or shortcuts/rules of thumb to make judgements Heuristic processing involves using mental shortcuts like a cognitive miser:
longer arguments are always convincing statistics dont lie you cant trust a lawyer

Dual Process Models of Persuasion

When is heuristic processing used? Petty and Wegener (1998) suggest a sufficiency threshold as long as heuristics produce an attitude that we are confident with Of not, systematic processing may be used Use of systematic processing also halted by:
Mood people in good moods tend to use heuristics (Gorn, 1982; Bohner et al., 1994) Emotion high-fear messages tend to be processes peripherally while low-fear more centrally.

Background to Cognitive Dissonance Theory

Framework for explaining the effect of behaviour and experience on formation and change in attitudes Festinger (1954) examined how attitudes, behaviour and self-esteem (self-image) are linked Any inconsistency may motivate change Recall ideas of cognitive imbalance (Heider, 1958) and cognitive incongruence (Osgood & Tannenbaum, 1955)

Cognitive Dissonance Theory

Key concept: Dissonance an unpleasant feeling of anxiety and of disequilibrium Premise 1: If a person does something (behaviour) OR is presented with counter-attitudinal information that is in contrast to his or her personal opinion (attitude) an internal conflict (dissonance) arises Premise 2: Dissonance motivates people to make alterations to their behavioural or internal states to restore the equilibrium between their attitudes and their behaviour Premise 3: Dissonance can be attenuated (reduced) using 3 means (1) reducing the importance of one of the dissonant elements (attitude change) (2) adding a consonant element (cognitive re-appraisal) (3) changing one of the dissonant elements (behaviour change)

Examples of Cognitive Dissonance Theory

Attitudes
A student believes hes intelligent and that intelligent people perform well at school

Dissonant Element
He gets bad grades all the time

Source of Dissonance
Discrepancy between belief in intelligence and performance

Strategy
1. 2. 3. Behavioural: Tries harder to get good grades Attitudinal: Believes hes not that intelligent Add consonant elements: I dont have time to study; My teacher is rubbish and unfair; Grades arent a good indicator of intelligence, anyway

You believe that Britney Spears is the best pop artist since Take That and you buy a her latest masterpiece

Your best friend says Britney is rubbish, has no talent and all her songs sound the same

Discrepancy between your attitudes and behaviour towards Britney and someone elses attitudes

1.
2. 3.

Behavioural: Sell Britney single on EBay recouping most of your losses Attitudinal: I guess shes not that good Add consonant elements: It said she was the queen of pop in Heat magazine, how can they be wrong; What do they know about music anyway? They like Westlife

Induced Compliance
Rating of Liking for the Task

2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 0 None $1

Payment

$20

Source: Festinger, L. & Carlsmith, J.M. (1959). Cognitive consequences of forced Compliance. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 58, 203-210.

Effort Justification
Sum of ratings
100 More interesting 95 90 85 80 75 70 Discussion Participants Object of the ratings Severe Mild Control

More boring

Source: Aronson & Mills 1959)

Induced Compliance
9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Arousal Attitude change

Free to chose, argued against own position Not free to choose, argued against own position Free to chose, argued for own position

Source: Croyle, R.T. and Cooper, J. (1983). Dissonance arousal: Physical evidence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45, 782-791.