Introduction to Attitudes

Introduction to Attitudes

Dr. K. A. Korb

University of Jos

Dr. K. A. KorbUniversity of Jos

Overview

Concept of AttitudesFormation of AttitudesRelationship between Attitudes and

Behavior


Attitudes

Attitude: Positive or negative reaction to a person, object, or idea Good-bad Harmful-Beneficial Pleasant-Unpleasant Likeable-Dislikable

VeryGood

VeryBad


Attitudes

Personality: Characteristic patterns of thought, emotions, and behavior Attitudes should change based on experience Personality should be relatively stable over

time


Assumptions

Three assumptions in the study of attitudes: An attitude is a hypothetical construct An attitude is a unidimensional construct Attitudes influence behavior

Differences in behavior toward an object can be explained by underlying attitudes


Areas of Research in Attitudes

How attitudes are formedHow attitudes are changedHow attitudes relate to behavioral

intentions How attitudes relate to behaviors

themselves


Function of Attitudes (Daniel Katz, 1960)

Instrumental: Develop attitudes to obtain a reward or avoid punishment Change: Convince alternative is more beneficial

Knowledge: Make sense of the world Change: Provide an explanation that makes more sense, or

explains more data Value-Expressive: Attitudes are an expression of one’s

values Difficult to change: Convince that an alternative attitude is

more consistent with values Social Adjustment: Hold the attitudes of people who

are similar Change: Change the social norms


Attitude Expression

Attitudes are manifested by Affective: Feelings about the object Behavioral: Interactions with the object Cognitive Information: What you think about

the object


Forming Attitudes

Direct Instruction: Instruction in attitudes Classical Conditioning: Law of Association Operant Conditioning: Law of Effect Observational Learning: Modeling Cognitive Dissonance: Behavior inconsistent

with attitudes results in attitude change Rational Analysis: Carefully weigh both sides

of an issue Social Comparison: Compare one’s attitudes to

others Primacy effect: First impression


Balance Theory (Heider, 1946)

Assumption: People have a drive toward psychological balance

Three components of the system: Person (P) Other Person (O) Object (X)

Liking relationships are balanced if the affect multiplies to positive


Person:You

Object:PDP

Other Person: Traditional Ruler

Like

Like

Like

Balance Theory (Heider, 1946)Balance Theory


Person:You

Object:PDP


Like

Dislike

Dislike

Balance Theory


P

O X

- +

-

Person:You

Object:PDP


Dislike

Dislike

Like

Balance Theory


P

O X

+ -

+

Person:You

Object:PDP


Like

Like

Dislike

Balance Theory


P

O X

+ +

-

Person:You

Object:PDP


Like

Dislike

Like

Balance Theory


Balance Theory


Balance Theory

With an imbalance, a person can: Change the opinion of the other person Change the opinion of the object Decide the other person is mistaken Avoid the other person and object

ConclusionMy friend’s friend is my friendMy friend’s enemy is my enemyMy enemy’s friend is my enemyMy enemy’s enemy is my friend(Heider, 1958)


Andrew left the house to go to the market with two of his friends. The market was filled with people, and he talked to an acquaintance while he waited on the vendor. On the way out, he stopped to chat with an old friend who was just going to the market. Leaving the market, he walked to school. On the way to the school, he talked to a girl whom he met the night before. Leaving the school, he started the walk home. He saw the girl he met the night before and crossed the street. He stopped by a Food Is Ready. The restaurant was filled with people and he noticed a few familiar faces. Andrew sat down at a table and waited quietly until he was able to place his order. When he finished his mineral, he went home.

Thomas left the house to go to the market. The market was filled with people and he noticed a few familiar faces. He waited quietly until he caught the attention of the vendor. When he finished at the market, he walked to school. On the way to the school, he saw a girl he met the night before and crossed the street. Leaving the school, he started the walk home with two of his friends. He stopped by a Food Is Ready. The restaurant was filled with people and he talked to an acquaintance while he waited to place his order. When he finished his mineral, he chatted with an old friend on his way out the door. He saw the girl he met the night before and stopped to talk to her.

Primacy Effect

Four potential interactions Left the house/market Waiting on vendor/place order Leaving the market/Food Is Ready Run into girl met the night before


Primacy Effect

Adapted from (Luchins, 1957)

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

Friendly Only Friendly-Unfriendly

Unfriendly-Friendly

Unfriendly Only

Per

cent R

ate

as F

rien

dly


Primacy Effect

Initial Interaction: Actively process information to make a decision

Decision: Positive or Negative AttitudeFuture Interactions

Accept further information related to decision Reject information not related to decision

Conclusion: Established attitudes shape future perceptions of information


Educational Implications

Teacher’s Attitudes Toward Students Ability Motivation Effort Likability

Student’s Attitudes Toward Teachers Start the course strict, can lighten up later Think of the impression you want to make,

specifically aim to foster that impression early



If students do not have a positive attitude, try to teach the appropriate attitude directly Direct Instruction and Rational Analysis

Model positive attitudes because your students will be observing you Classical Conditioning, Observational Learning, Social

Comparison

Reward students for appropriate attitudes with social approval and recognition Operant Conditioning



Ensure that students with appropriate attitudes are not punished Operant Conditioning

If students’ behavior does not match their professed attitudes, point it out Cognitive Dissonance

Use popular students to assist you with attitude modification Social Comparison


Interpreting Correlations

Nature Positive: Two variables increase or decrease together Negative: As one variable increases, the other

decreases

Strength Closer to -1 or +1 is stronger relationship 0 is no relationship

Negative PositiveNature:

Strength:

0-1 +1


Correlation = 1.00

15

17

19

21

23

25

27

29

31

33

35

30 35 40 45 50

Shoe Size

Siz

e o

f Feet

(cm

)


Correlation = .04

0.00

0.50

1.00

1.50

2.00

2.50

3.00

3.50

4.00

4.50

0.00 2.00 4.00 6.00 8.00 10.00 12.00 14.00

Shoe Size

Inte

llig

ence


Correlation = .78

-

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0 2 4 6 8 10

Hours Studied

Exa

m S

core

.


0.00

0.50

1.00

1.50

2.00

2.50

3.00

3.50

4.00

0 2 4 6 8 10

Hours per day watching TV

GP

A .

Correlation = -.86


Attitudes and Behavior

Early Major Research Question: Do attitudes determine behavior?

Attitudes Behavior



LaPiere’s Classic Study (1934) American’s perception of Chinese

Corey (1937) attitudes and cheating studyWicker (1969) reviewed 42 studies

Average correlation between attitudes and behavior was .15

Recommended to abandon construct of attitude



Reasons why Attitudes do not correlate with Behavior Expressed attitudes may not be the same as

true attitudes Aspects of Attitude have varying relationships

with behavior Affective, Behavioral, or Cognitive

Differences in perceptions of the question General vs. Specific Attitudes and Behavior


General vs. Specific Attitudes and Behavior

Most studies tried to predict specific behaviors from general attitudes

Three solutions: Predict wide range of behaviors

Multiple Act Criterion Predict same behavior in several contexts

Repeated Observation CriterionCorrelations will be about .60

Measure specific attitudes


General vs. Specific Attitudes and Behavior

(Fishbein & Ajzen, 1974) Assessed participants’:

General religious attitude 100 specific religious behaviors

Own bible, take a course in religion, going shopping on the Sabbath, refuse to attend class on religious holiday

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1

Single Act Multiple Acts

Corr

elat

ion


General vs. Specific Attitudes and Behavior (Davidson & Jaccard, 1979)

Predict use of birth control pills

00.10.20.30.40.50.60.70.80.9

1

Birth Control Birth Control Pills Using Pills Using Pills within2 Years

Corr

elat

ion



Principle of Compatibility: Attitudes and Behavior should correspond on the following Target: Reason for performing a behavior Action: Behavior to be examined Context: Location where behavior will be executed Time: When behavior will be completed

Conclusion: If measure general attitude, use multiple behaviors If predicting specific behavior, measure attitude toward

that specific behavior


Attitudes and Behavior(Ajzen & Fishbein, 1977) Analyzed studies to determine whether

they met the Principle of Compatibility All studies that met the Principle of

Compatibility had significant correlations (N=26)

Near-perfect correlation between Compatibility and Level of Attitude-Behavior consistency r = .83


Conclusion

Fishbein & Ajzen concluded that Attitude is one of a number of constructs that influences behavior

Current research questions: What variables moderate the influence of

attitudes on behavior?

Attitudes Moderator Behavior


Revision

What are attitudes?How are attitudes formed?How should attitudes and behavior be

measured to get a significant relationship?


Documents

Introduction to Attitudes