February 11th Notes
February 11th Notes Psych 360
Popular in Social Psych
Popular in Psychlogy
This 8 page Class Notes was uploaded by Lorena Roberts on Thursday February 11, 2016. The Class Notes belongs to Psych 360 at University of Tennessee - Knoxville taught by Dr. Lowell Gaertner in Spring 2016. Since its upload, it has received 345 views. For similar materials see Social Psych in Psychlogy at University of Tennessee - Knoxville.
Reviews for February 11th Notes
Report this Material
What is Karma?
Karma is the currency of StudySoup.
You can buy or earn more Karma at anytime and redeem it for class notes, study guides, flashcards, and more!
Date Created: 02/11/16
Attitudes 1 February 11, 2016 Attitudes I. What is an “Attitude?” General tendency to evaluate something positively or negatively There’s a link between attitude and behavior A. Tripartite Model of Attitudes A.1. Affect: feelings How does the attitude object make you feel? Not always the same as how you evaluate it. A.2. Cognition: thoughts about the object A.2. Behavioral Intention: How you intend to behave toward the object This isn’t actually what you do. Over time, there’s a drift toward consistency. B. Balance Theory and Cognitive Consistency Sentiment Relations: attitude Unit Relations: the idea that things belong together or not Homophobia Example (Adams, Wright, and Lohr,1996) Participants are heterosexual males; some were highly Homophobic and others weren’t Wanted to know whether or not homophobics were aware Of their physiological reaction to gay porn Attitudes 2 II. How Do Attitudes Form? Attitudes come from genetics A. Learning A.1. Classical Conditioning UCS UCR E.g.Razran (1940) CS Olson & Fazio (2006) Reverse racism using classical conditioning Photos of white and black people as well as pictures of good things and bad things Black people were consistently paired with positive things, white paired with bad things Found that white people had good feelings towards black people (reverse of what you would think the outcome would be) A.2. Operant Conditioning: our behaviors have consequences Negative consequences mean less future frequency Positive consequences means more future frequency E.g.Insko (1965) “Aloha Week Festival” Phone calls with “good” response for positive feedback and no response for negative feedback Other way around for the other group; verbally positively reinforced for saying something negative A questionnaire was passed out that asked how favorable they were towards the Aloha week. Those who were more in favored of Aloha Week were the ones who were positively reinforced for giving positive feedback about Aloha Week *Some attitudes are learned through operant and classical conditioning* B. Cognitive Responses C. As a Consequence of our Behavior III. How Do We Measure Attitudes? A. SelfReport “How do you feel about pizza” 1 = bad to 7 = good. People will be honest with you about how they feel towards some things, but not others. Example: Will tell you about how they feel about pizza, but not towards Hispanics Attitudes 3 B. Indirect Approaches Implicit Associations Test ( Greenwald, McGhee, & Schwartz, 1988) IV. Attitude Affects Behavior Positive attitude: more apt to behave in that way Negative: more apt to not behave that way A. LowtoNo Association in Initial Research Attitude and Behavior had no correspondence in early tests E.g., La Pierre (1934) Traveled around the US with a Chinese couple going to different restaurants; 98% of the restaurants: they were seated Afterwards, he wrote a letter to each restaurant asking if they let Chinese people in, to which most of them replied “no” In this case, attitude and behavior are not correlated B. Methodological Improvements Reveal Attitude – Behavior Link Fishbein and Azjen Developed the idea that attitude and behavior relationships should be handled carefully 1. Multiple Act Criterion When we improve our methods, we see better lengths in which the theories think we should see 2. Specificity of Attitude and Behavior A general attitude can be measured; E.g., Weigel & Newman (1976) Time 1………….Attitudes toward environmental protection embedded in a larger survey 3months………..sign petitions opposing costal drilling, nuclear plants, regulate emissions 4.5 months……..telephoned “Participate in road side litter clean up” and who actually participated 6 months……….telephoned “Participate in recycling program” and who actually participated C. Theory of Reasoned Action (Azjen & Fishbein) Attitudes 4 1. Attitude Toward The Behavior 2. Subjective Norms Lose Attitudes 5 V. Behavior Affects Attitude A. Cognitive Dissonance as Cognitive Consistency (Leon Festinger) 1. Relationship Among Cognitions: consonant, dissonant, irrelevant 2. Cognitive Dissonance 3. Intensity of Dissonance 4. Reducing the Dissonance a. Change One of the Cognitions b. Add Consonant Cognitions c. Change the Importance of the Cognitions Classic studies of Cognitive Dissonance E.g., Festinger and Carlsmith (1959 pegboard task. E.g.,Aronson and Mills (1959) initiation B. Cognitive Dissonance as SelfProtection Reinterpreted as a response to a threat to the self, rather than a response to cognitive inconsistency. Efforts to reduce the dissonance are viewed as efforts for selfprotection. 1. Factors Necessary to Arouse Dissonance a. Behavior Produces an Aversive Event AND b. Person Accepts Responsibility for the Aversive Event 1. Free Choice 2. Foreseeable Consequences 2. Example of Process + Consequence No Diss Reinterpret Consequences Behavior Not Responsible Consequence Dissonance Reinterpret Responsibility Responsible E.g., Nel, Helmrich & Aronson (1969) Attitudes 6 Incentive (high vs low pay for counterattiduinal message) X Audience (Promessage, Antimessage, Undecided) C. Cognitive Dissonance: SelfProtection as Consistency D. Bem’s SelfPerception Theory (Daryl Bem) E. Evidence of DissonanceArousal Eg. Zanna & Cooper (1974): (Low vs High choice for counter attitudinal essay) X (alleged effect of a Pill) H H Attitude toward H Issue H L H L H L H H H L H L L H Tense Noeffect Relax E.g., Cooper, Zanna, & Taves (1978) (Low vs High choice for counter att essay) x (Placebo vs Tranquilizer) H Attitude toward H Issue H H L H L H L L H H Placebo Tranquilizer Attitudes 7 VI. Persuasion: Active Attempt to Change Attitude Persuasion is an active attempt to change attitudes. A. Message Learning Approach Carl Hovlan The person must ATTEND, COMPREHEND, and RETAIN the message. A.1. Characteristics of the Source: Who is Persuasive? a. Credibility b. Attractiveness A.2. Characteristics of the Message: What Messages are Persuasive? a. Number of Arguments b. 1 sided vs. 2 sided messages A.3. Characteristics of the Target: Who is persuaded? B. Cognitive Response Theory Greenwald and Brock B.1. Distraction E.g., Festinger and Maccoby (1964) E.g., Osterhouse and Brock (1970) B.2. Forewarning C. Elaboration Likelihood Model Petty and Cacioppo (1981) C.1. Two Routes to Persuasion C.1.a. Central Processing C.1.b. Peripheral Processing C.2. Motivation & Ability Determine The Route Attitudes 8 C.3. Paradigm in which Petty & Cacioppo Tested the ELM Three variables were manipulated: Involvement, Source Cue, and Message Strength. C.3.a Involvement C.3.b Source Cue C.3.c Message Strength Low Involvement High Involvement S S W S S S S S S S S S S S W S S W W S S W W W W W W W W W W High School Professor High School Professor Student Student
Are you sure you want to buy this material for
You're already Subscribed!
Looks like you've already subscribed to StudySoup, you won't need to purchase another subscription to get this material. To access this material simply click 'View Full Document'