Background Information on Attitude Formation. Betsch et al.

After the Second World War, it was inferred that attitude formation followed general learning processes such as classical and operant conditioning. Attitudes are a byproduct of learning and socialization. Classical conditioning discovered by Ivan Pavlov, development of responses to certain non-natural occurring stimuli. Operant conditioning learning due to the natural consequences of our actions, response to environment that we are presented with. Next attitude formation was thought of as an active cognitive process involving understanding and involvement of persuasive information. Probabilistic decision theory lead to development of theory of reasoned action (Fishbein and Ajzen 1975) which is based on expected utility theory and economic theory. Theory of reasoned action states that attitudes are involve deliberation that considers weighted integration of valued consequences. Idea that people not only use rational systematic decision making allows for addition of simple judgmental intuition and creation of Dual process theory (an integration of both theories). Elaboration likelihood model (ELM) when motivation is low, processing capabilities are constrained and lead to shallow information processing and apply simple judgmental heuristics (ex. Conforming to the majoritys opinion). Value account model how value charged information contributes to implicit or explicit attitude formation. To study implicit attitude formation, used a series of dual task experiments where one task is meant to distract the subjects so that correlation between memory and attitude formation would not exist.

Katz 1960
Determination of human attitudes have two schools of thought: 1) Humans are, by nature, have limited powers of reason, cannot discriminate well and have short memories. (Easily swayed by appeals to vanity or emotion.) 2) Humans are rational and possesses ability to discriminate, self reflect and seeks understanding. (Relies extremely heavily on getting adequate information to people for use) Instead of focusing on perceptual and cognitive processes, focuses on specific conditions of attitude change. Flaws with previous research and their solutions: Problem: previous research details factors that are not genuine psychological variables (i.e.

group prejudice or exposure to mass media). Difficult to define personal values based on this information. Solution: By dealing with function that attitudes perform, generalizations can be made. Problem: Oversimplification. Solution: Not only accept that there may be varying motivational forces behind attitudes and behavior, but also that different people may have varying contexts of motivational forces. Problem: Lack of specific conditions in which attitudes change. Solution: Define concepts that points to motive and methods which in turn explain cognitive reorganization (attitude change) Attitudes can be broken down thusly: Intensity- strength of the affective component. Cognitive 1) specificity or generality of attitude, 2) degree of differentiation (how many beliefs are contained within the attitude) Centrality how closely the attitudes value system is to the individuals self concept Instrumental, utilitarian, adjustive maximization of rewards (past or present/consistency of rewards) Ego-defensive function Value expressive function satisfaction from the expression of attitude Knowledge function standards or reference to understanding the world. Attitudes perform 4 major functions

Exemplifies strategies to change the attitudes of each type of functions. Discussion of how various psychoanalytic concepts can explain the relationship between motive, conflict, ego-defense and attitude. Certain attitudes may ease the tension between motives. Attitudes consist of motives that are consciously acceptable and consciously unacceptable. Various examples are given to show that certain social attitudes may facilitate the operation of certain ego-defensive attitudes.

Sarnoff 1960

Shafir, Simonson, and Tversky 1993

Decision makers seek and construct reasons that justify their choices when offered one. When given equally valuable choices, people construct different value judgements (preferences) When given pros and cons of choices, weight and value of component parts will determine decision. Choices under conflict insecurity of how to trade off one attribute relative to another. Designed surveys to ask dominant questions where benefit is clearly larger and distance needed to walk is the same, and compared to situations of varying distance and reward as a

conflict question. Subjects tendency was to search for additional alternatives when choices are harder to rationalize. Adding additional choices when given the choice to delay decision, increases likelihood that decision will be delayed, not that a conflictchoice will be made. When undergraduate students were offered a choice to buy, or not buy, not knowing if they had passed an exam they would have to retake or pay an additional $5 to leave after knowing results, student chose to resolve uncertainty and pay the additional $5. Due to disjunction effect.

Strack and Deustch

Modeling for dual process theory. Takes into account both reflective(rational) and impulsive processes. Develops relationship between attitude and behavior and describes in either synergistic/antagonistic fashion. Integrations previous modeling with additional involvement of motivational components.

Before and after of attitude to behavior pathway.

Impulsively aggressive behavior often due to reflective underregulation. Often cases, patients with structural damage in the prefrontal cortex or nucleus accumbens demonstrate similar aggressive behavior.

Wicker 1969
Older account of experiments done in the past that reinforce dual theory. Conceptual(rational/reflective) and Validational (Impulsive) Describe several experiments: Ex/ Data gathered for work performance with a wide range of professions and types of people. Vroom found only slight relationships between job attitudes and job performance. Different empirical work provided for various attitudes towards jobs, minority groups, and misc. (including cheating, labor union participation, public housing application and research participation) Validational attitudes are based upon personal factors (verbal, intellectual, social abilities, previous experience and activity level or involvement/excitedness of subject) and situational factors