We interpret everything we see or hear in terms of our schemas, how we think. Attitudes are ways in which we evaluate our social world. In this post, we will look at the definition of attitude, how they form, and what they are for. Then, we will explore the relationship between attitudes and behavior, persuasion as a tool to change attitudes, and cognitive dissonance.
What are Attitudes?
📔 Attitudes are evaluations we make about objects, ideas, events, or other people. Attitudes can be positive or negative. Explicit attitudes are conscious beliefs that can guide decisions and behavior. Implicit attitudes are unconscious beliefs that can still influence decisions and behavior.
They refer to favorable/unfavorable reactions about matters, ideas, people, groups, objects, etc.
They may be ambivalent. Reactions are not always evenly positive or negative. For example, we may want to eat chocolate because it tastes good (positive evaluation), but we may not want to eat it because it is too caloric (negative evaluation).
They are hard to change. If they are evenly positive or negative, they are even harder to change.
Social psychologists study attitudes because they influence social thought and behavior.
How do attitudes form?
Attitudes can form through direct experience, social influence, formal education, conditioning processes, and observation.
Social learning
An important source of attitude formation may be obvious: we learn them from other people through social learning. Part of how we see the world was acquired by interacting with and observing other people. This social learning can happen through various processes.
Classical conditioning
When a stimulus seems to regularly precede another, the first stimulus can easily become a signal that indicates that the second stimulus happens after it. This is one of the basic principles of psychology. Classical conditioning is related to the formation of attitudes in the sense that we learn through association.
A child may not have a strong reaction when he/she is close to a minority group. However, if he/she sees that his/her parent gets anxious when they are close to a minority group, the child will also end up getting anxious when he/she is close to a similar minority group.
Instrumental conditioning
Instrumental conditioning helps us learn to hold the “right” opinions. When we do something and it has positive consequences, those behaviors will be reinforced and we will repeat them more. On the contrary, if our actions lead to negative consequences, we will do them less and may even suppress them. This is the way children learn what is “right” or “appropriate”.
Observational learning
Another process through which attitudes are formed is observational learning, or learning through examples. It happens when individuals learn new behaviors simply by observing how others act (Bandura, 1997). Observational learning often takes place through media and influential people.
This kind of learning happens even when those performing the action don’t want others to learn from them. For example, when parents smoke in front of their children, they often instruct them not to smoke themselves. However, observational learning is powerful, and those children are more likely to do what their parents do than what they tell them to do.
Social comparison
Social comparison is our tendency to compare ourselves to others to determine whether our perceptions of social reality are correct or not (Festinger, 1954). When our opinions or perceptions agree with those of others, we conclude that we must be right. New attitudes may form due to social comparison, and we often change our opinions and perspectives because of how a group we belong (or want to belong to) thinks.
Genetic factors
Researchers studied identical twins (same DNA) and fraternal twins (different DNA) and they saw stronger correlations between identical twins, even when they were separated as children.
Some studies suggest that attitudes related to preferences (music, food) may be more strongly influenced by genetics, but less so to attitudes related to cognitive aspects (social groups or death penalty).
The Function of Attitudes
Attitudes can serve functions for the individual.
Cognitive: attitudes work as mental frameworks that help us interpret and process information.
Self-repression and self-identity: attitudes allow us to express our central values and beliefs.
Self-esteem: attitudes help us keep or reaffirm our feelings of trust towards ourselves. We have the need to believe that our attitudes are the right ones.
Self-defense: attitudes help us protect ourselves from undesired information about ourselves.
Motivation: attitudes may help us make a good impression.
Relationship Between Attitudes and Behavior
In general, our attitudes drive our behavior. For example, if you don’t like pineapple on pizza, you will most likely not order pineapple pizza. However, there is sometimes a breach between attitude and behavior. For example, if a friend just bought a car that you find hideous, you may refrain from telling them your honest opinion for the sake of not hurting their feelings.
When do attitudes influence behavior?
Let’s look at the different mechanisms through which attitudes influence behavior.
Situational factors
Situational factors moderate the relationship between attitudes and behavior. Situational restrictions prevent us from expressing our attitudes through explicit behavior.
We tend to prefer situations in which we can express our attitudes through our behavior.
Characteristics of the attitude
The relationship between attitudes and behavior is strongly influenced by several aspects of the attitudes themselves.
Origin: attitudes formed by direct experience are easier to remember and, therefore, will have a stronger effect on our behavior.
Strength: the stronger the attitude, the bigger impact it will have on behavior. “Strength” involves intensity (strength of the emotional reaction caused by the object of the attitude), importance (the extent to which the individual knowingly cares about that attitude and is personally invested in it), knowledge (how much the individual knows about the subject), and accessibility (how easy it is to remember the attitude in different situations).
Specificity: it refers to the extent to which the attitudes are focused on specific aspects or situations (e.g. going to mass on Sundays), rather than general ones (e.g. religion).
How do attitudes influence behavior?
There are several mechanisms through which attitudes shape behavior.
Attitudes, reasoning, behavior
The first mechanism occurs in situations where we can carefully think about our attitudes and their implications.
The Theory of Reasoned Action (which later evolved into the theory of planned behavior) suggests that a person’s decision to perform the behavior is the result of a rational process that is directed towards the goal, and that follows a logical sequence. The individual considers the behavioral options, evaluates the consequences, and makes a decision.
Attitudes, behavioral immediate reactions
What happens in situations when we need to act quickly? In those cases, attitudes seem to have a more direct and automatic influence on behavior. According to the model of the “from attitude to behavior” process (Fazio, 1989; Fazio & Roskos-Ewoldsen, 1994), a certain event activates an attitude; that attitude then influences our perception of the object of attitude. At the same time, our knowledge of what’s appropriate in a specific situation is also activated. Together, our attitudes and the information previously stored about what’s appropriate or expected, shape our definition of the event. This perception then influences our behavior.
In short, our attitudes affect our behavior through at least two mechanisms, and these two operate under different circumstances.
Persuasion
Persuasion refers to the efforts to change other people’s attitudes by using different kinds of messaging.
Traditional approach
In most cases, persuasion efforts consist of the following elements: some source conveys some sort of message (communication) to a person or group of people (audience). Early research on persuasion focused on these key elements, asking, ‘Who says what to whom and with what effect?’ This approach led to interesting results.
Credible communicators (e.g. experts) are more persuasive (Hovland & Weiss, 1951).
Attractive communicators are more persuasive (Hovland & Weiss, 1951).
The messages that don’t seem to be designed to change attitudes are more effective (Walster & Festinger, 1962).
Sometimes, people are more vulnerable to persuasion when they are distracted (Allyn & Festinger, 1962).
When the audience’s opinions are opposed to the communicator, it is more effective to adopt a bilateral approach (rather than unilateral).
People who speak fast are more persuasive than those who speak slowly (Miller et al., 1976).
Persuasion is more effective when the message activates emotion (Robberson & Rogers, 1988).
Cognitive approach
What happens when we are exposed to a persuasive message? We process persuasive messages in two ways: central route and peripheral route.
Central route or systematic processing: it implies careful consideration of the contents and ideas of the message. This critical evaluation of the arguments presented requires a lot of effort and in-depth thought process around the message. This route leads to lasting change and helps predict behavior. It’s the route we take when we know the subject very well, when the message is important, if we want the message to reach everyone, and if the receptor is interested in the matter.
Peripheral route or heuristic processing: it implies using mental shortcuts that allow us to react in a more automatic way. Here, the attitude is influenced by external factors (such as the attractiveness of a source). This route leads to less lasting change. It’s the route we’ll take if we don’t know the topic very well and/or the receptor is distracted.
The Elaboration Likelihood Model (ELM) of persuasion is a dual process theory describing the change of attitudes (Petty & Cacioppo, 1980). The model aims to explain different ways of processing stimuli, why they are used, and their outcomes on attitude change. The Heuristic-Systematic Model of information processing (HSM) is a widely recognized model (Chaiken, Liberman & Eagly) that attempts to explain how people receive and process persuasive messages. HSM is quite similar to ELM.
Are we reluctant to persuasion?
In general, we are very reluctant to persuasion. Otherwise, our attitudes would be constantly changing. There are different ways in which we resist persuasion:
Reactance. Reactance is a negative reaction that a person experiments when their freedom is threatened. Reactance theory assumes that human beings have an innate desire for autonomy and independence and experience psychological rejection when they sense that their freedom is threatened or eliminated. When people feel that their freedom is threatened, they are motivated to maintain and restore the threatened opinion or behavior (Brehm and Brehm, 1981).
Forewarning. We are less likely to be persuaded when we know that a message was designed to alter our opinions and attitudes. Forewarning gives us a better chance to formulate counterarguments that may minimize the impact of the message.
Selective avoidance. We tend to drive our attention away from information that opposes our current attitudes. Generally, we tend to pay attention to information that confirms our attitudes and switch off when we find conflicting information. This is one of the strategies to avoid cognitive dissonance.
Active defense of our attitude. A more active resistance strategy is to counter-argue the message. Counterarguments are activated when incoming information is compared to existing beliefs and discrepancies are noted (Wright, 1973). When counterarguments against opposing attitudes are offered, individuals are motivated to generate even more counterarguments. McGuire (1961) suggested that attitudes could be inoculated against persuasive attacks in much the same way that one's immune system can be inoculated against viral attacks. His inoculation theory explains how immunity to counter-attitudinal messages is conferred by exposing people to weakened doses of challenging information.
Biased processing and attitude polarization. To resist persuasive messages, people can also engage in biased processing, so that a message fits their attitudes and behavior or reduces relevance. Another strategy consists of assessing mixed evidence of information in such a way that backs our initial attitude and, therefore, makes it more radical.
Cognitive Dissonance
Cognitive dissonance, a concept developed by Festinger in the 1950s, is a discomfort that we experience when our beliefs, behaviors, and attitudes are not consistent with each other and we are aware of it. This discomfort makes us anxious, tense, and uncomfortable. When those feelings of discomfort or imbalance occur, people are motivated to alleviate or resolve that incongruity or dissonance.
In 1957, Festinger published A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance, where he explained the experiment he conducted on cognitive dissonance, in which subjects had to carry out a series of boring and trivial tasks. They were then asked to lie to the next subject (a confederate) by telling them that the tasks were fun and interesting. Some of the subjects were offered a dollar for lying, while others were given twenty dollars.
Both the subjects who received nothing and those who received twenty dollars said that the tasks were boring, that they hadn’t learned anything, and that they would not be interested in repeating the experiment. Surprisingly, those who received one dollar for lying were the subjects who rated the tasks most positively after the experiment, saying that they were entertaining and that they wouldn't mind doing the experiment again. This may be explained by the fact that the subjects who were paid twenty dollars should not have experienced any dissonance, since they already felt rewarded enough and were more than justified for lying. By contrast, those who received a dollar had little justification or reason for lying and were likely feeling cognitive dissonance. To reduce that dissonance, their brains re-evaluated the tasks and reconsidered that they were not boring but interesting and enjoyable.
Techniques to Reduce Cognitive Dissonance
The techniques to reduce cognitive dissonance can be divided into two main types: direct and indirect.
Direct techniques focus on the discrepancies between attitudes and behavior.
Change attitudes or behavior so that they are consistent with each other.
Add new information that supports our attitudes/behaviors.
Decide that the inconsistency is actually not relevant (trivialize).
Indirect techniques don’t do anything about the discrepancy by trying to reduce the unpleasant feelings. We are more likely to use these techniques with important attitudes or beliefs about ourselves.
Self-affirmation: restore the positive self-evaluations that are threatened by the dissonance (focus on positive attributes).
Anything else that reduces the unpleasant feeling (entertainment, expressing positive attitudes, alcohol, etc.).
Let’s imagine that your dream has always been to live in a penthouse downtown. However, you look at the offers available and realize that a penthouse is too expensive and all you can afford is an apartment on the outskirts of the city. Below are the different mechanisms you may use to reduce that discomfort or dissonance.
Mechanisms | Examples |
Change one of the thoughts. | “The penthouse may not have been a good idea” or “Perhaps that wasn’t really my dream”. |
Change the behavior. | Not buy the penthouse and buy the apartment instead. |
Add new information. | Find out that living downtown is too noisy and parking is limited in the area. |
Give more importance to the consistent idea. | “The apartment is more convenient, it’s close to a metro station, and it has a school nearby”. |
Trivialize the inconsistency or regard the dissonant part as less important. | “Living downtown is not that important to me”. |
Withdraw legitimate status from the dissonant evidence. | “The only penthouse offer I saw looked like a scam”. |