Upload
sanjeev-kumar
View
186
Download
1
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Attitudes and Alternative Evaluation
p.n.l
Consumer Behavior
Topic Highlights Definition of Attitudes Why Do We Hold Attitudes? How Are Attitudes Formed? The Components of Attitude The Attitude-Behavior Relationship Alternative Evaluation Multiattribute Attitude Models Noncompensatory Decision Rules
Attitude: Definition
An attitude is a learned predisposition to respond in a consistently favorable or unfavorable manner with respect to a given object
Functions:Why Do We Hold Attitudes? Utilitarian Function: We form positive attitudes
towards products that give us “pleasure” and negative towards ones that give us “pain.”
Value-expressive Function: A product attitude is based on what we think that attitude says about us. The attitude is a function of our self-concept.
Ego-defensive Function: Our product attitudes are a result of us “protecting” ourselves from psychological threats.
Knowledge Function: Product attitudes are formed as a result of our need for order, structure, and meaning.
Forming Attitudes Theory of Cognitive Dissonance Self-Perception Theory
Can behavior influence attitudes? Social Judgment Theory
Latitudes of Acceptance and Rejection Assimilation Effect Contrast Effect
Forming Attitudes (contd.) Balance Theory
Triads contain: (1) A Person and His or Her Perception of;
(2) an Attitude Object and; (3) Some Other Person or Object
Balanced Unit Relation (like belief – element “belongs” to another) Sentiment Relation (like affect – preference for element)
Application of Balance Theory
Traditional View of Attitude
ATTITUDE
Cognitive Component
(Beliefs)
Conative Component (Behavioral Intentions)
Affective Component (Feelings)
Attitude Effects
Alternative View of Attitude
Beliefs Feelings
Attitude
Behavioral Intention
Behavior
Predictive Vs. Diagnostic Power
Beliefs Feelings
Attitude
Behavioral Intention
Behavior
Weaker Stronger
Stronger Weaker
PredictivePower
DiagnosticPower
The Attitude-Behavior Relationship
LaPiere (1934) Traveled with Chinese graduate student around the
country one summer Concluded that attitudes do not influence behavior
Wicker (1969) Meta-analysis of 33 studies Concluded that attitude-behavior relationship is, at
best, weak
Explanations for this Evidence Lack of Correspondence in Levels of
Specificity Action, Target, Time, Context
Time Interval Social Influences Other Nonattitudinal Influences
Correspondence in Levels of Specificity Action Component
Attitude measurement and behavior measurement should correspond in terms of action
Target Component Attitude measure and behavior measure
should be as specific as each other in terms of target
Correspondence in Levels of Specificity (contd.) Time Component
If time frame for completion of behavior is relevant, it should be included in measure of attitude
Context Component If the context within which a behavior is
performed is relevant, it should be considered in the measure of attitude
Explantions for Evidence on Attitude-Behavior Relationship
Correspondence in Levels of Specificity Time Interval
The closer in time the measurement of attitude and the measurement of behavior, the higher will be the relationship
Social Influences Reference groups may influence your behavior in a certain direction
irrespective of attitude
Other Nonattitudinal Influences Financial constraints, environmental constraints, etc.
Determining the Choice SetAll Possible Choice Alternatives
Evoked SetAlternatives known
to the consumer
Inept SetAlternatives unknown
to the consumer
Consideration SetAlternatives considered during decision making
Inert SetAlternatives not considered
during decision making
Brand PurchasedBrands considered but
not purchased
The Alternative Evaluation Process
Determine Evaluative
Criteria
Determine Choice
Alternatives
Assess Performance of Alternatives
Apply Decision Rule
Compensatory Decision Rules
Multi-Attribute (Expectancy-Value) Models Consider the determinants or factors that underlie
evaluation or attitude In general, we like (have favorable attitude towards)
objects we associate with “good attributes” and develop unfavorable feelings towards objects we associate with “bad attributes”
A Multi-Attribute Model
If we can estimate Probablity (attribute), and Value (attribute)
Then we should be able to predict a person’s evaluation of the object (department store)
Wide Selection
Convenient Locations
High Quality
Low Price
Department Store
Types of Multiattribute Models
Fishbein Model
Ao=biei Ideal Point Model
Ao=Wi|Ii-Xi|Where:Ao=Attitude towards objectbi=Belief that object possesses attribute iei=Evaluation of attribute in=Number of salient attributesWi=Importance weight of attribute iIi=Ideal point for attribute iXi=Performance of brand X on attribute i
i=1
n
i=1
n
Evaluation MeasuresEvaluation (ei):
A store with a wide selection of products is:good ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ bad
+3 0 -3
A store with low prices is:good ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ bad
+3 0 -3
Belief MeasuresBelief (bi):
Store X has a wide selection of products is: likely ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ unlikely
+3 0 -3
Store X has low prices is: probable ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ improbable
+3 0 -3
A Multiattribute Evaluation
Wide Selection +2 +2 +3 +3
Low Price -1 +3 -2 -1
High Quality +3 -1 +3 +1
ConvenientLocations
+2 +2 +2 +3
Attribute ei Store X Store Y Store Z
Beliefs
Strengths of Multiattribute Models Looks at a BASIS for attitudes Can provide diagnostic help Can reveal whether consumer perceptions
are accurate
Changing Attitudes Change belief (e.g., change product, advertising,
etc.) Change evaluation (e.g., Nakamichi tape decks) Add a dimension (e.g., Bud “born-on” date) Change decision rule (e.g., shift to
noncompensatory rule) Change beliefs about competitors (e.g., “Their
cars are not made in America”)
Noncompensatory Decision Rules Lexicographic Rule
Select most important attribute; pick brand that does best on that attribute. In case of tie, go to next most important attribute and so on
Elimination by Aspects Establish cutoff, then select most important attribute;
pick brand that meets cutoff on most important attribute; in case of tie, consider next most important attribute and pick brand that meets cutoff on that attribute
Noncompensatory Rules (contd.) Conjunctive Rule
Establish cutoff levels for all attributes and select brand that meets cutoffs on all attributes
Disjunctive Rule Establish cutoff for all attributes and select
brand that meets cutoff on at least one attribute (i.e., brand must have some redeeming feature)