Chapters 4 & 9: Dual-Process Theories of Behavior and Persuasion
Judgment & Behavior What s the relationship between attitudes and behavior? K-A-B Hierarchy (Knowledge-Attitude-Behavior) Wicker (1969) It is considerably more likely that attitudes will be unrelated or only slightly related to overt behaviors than that attitudes will be closely related to actions.
Zanna and Rempel Model of Attitudes Attitudes formed through beliefs (cognition), affect, and behavior. All three influence attitudes, and attitudes affect all three reciprocally.
Zanna and Rempel Model Diagram Beliefs Attitudes Affect Behaviors
Theory of Reasoned Action (Based on Fishbein Model) (1) Beliefs and (2) Belief evaluations Attitude Page 103 (1) Ideas about others wishes and (2) motivation to comply with them Intention Subjective norm Behavior
Attitudes and Behavior Allport (1935): An attitude is a mental and neural state of readiness to respond, organized through experience exerting a directive and/or dynamic influence on behavior. Under what conditions (?) do what types of attitudes (?) held by what types of people (?) lead to what types of behaviors?
Attitude-Behavior Personal Variables 1. Personal Norms: Codes of conduct adopted individually that may conflict with attitudes. e.g., New Year s Resolutions
Attitude-Behavior Personal Variables 2. Self-monitoring: sensitivity and responsiveness to social cues High -- Social Chameleons adapt to setting (Social Norms). Low: attitudes more likely to directly guide behavior.
Attitude-Behavior Personal Variables 3. Locus of Control : where the forces that dictate outcomes reside External -- Luck controls outcomes. Behavior unrelated to attitudes. Internal -- Master of own destiny. Attitudes guide behavior directly.
Attitude-Behavior Personal Variables 4. Attitude accessibility: Ease with which attitudes come to mind (activated) to influence behavior a) Direct Influence: attitudes guide behavior. b) Selective Perception: focusing on positive or negative aspects due to an attitude.
MODE model of Attitude-Behavior Relationships Proposes two different routes by which attitudes guide behavior 1) Deliberate: effortfully consider behavior based on attitude contents (like TRA) 2) Spontaneous: choose a behavior without much thought (New in MODE).
MODE: Motivation and Opportunity as DEterminants 1) Motivation: e.g., Involvement, Accountability, and Risk 2) Opportunity: Cognitive Capacity (Processing Load), and Time Deliberate route taken only when Motivation and opportunity are BOTH HIGH
MODE model of Attitude-Behavior Spontaneous Route Attitude activation Depends on Strength of Association Behavior Selective perception Object perception Event Definition Norms Situation Definition Page 102
Measuring Attitudes in MODE 1) Self-report: Ask directly using Semantic Differential, Likert, or Guttman Scales,etc. Predicts Deliberate Route Well 2) Response Latency: Prime participants with attitude object (product or issue), then record TIME it takes to categorize positive or negative adjectives (e.g., good or bad ). Spontaneous well, but also Deliberate
Response Latency Measures 1) Measure Strength of Association 2) Administered Unobtrusively Uncover implicit attitudes of which people may be unaware: Knowing or Unknowing False Representation I m not telling you my attitude. I m not that kind of person.
Implicit Attitude Change? Traditional/Intuitive ideas about dissuasion and changing stereotyping and prejudice: Point out negative behaviors to (re)enforce idea that they are negative
Associative Interference and Negative Brand Associations Meals Products Hamburgers McDonald s Essentially Worms
Implicit Attitude Change? Associative Interference Alternative: Provide a number of positive ideas that connect in order to give new pathways for activation to spread
Elaboration-Likelihood Model of Persuasion (ELM) (Petty & Cacioppo, 1986) Persuasion: knowledge leads to attitudes ELM: two routes to persuasion 1) Central - effortfully scrutinize ads 2) Peripheral - view effortlessly
Elaboration-Likelihood Model The Central Route Classic persuasion (Message Learning) Assimilate agreed-upon tenets from ads into our viewpoints: Illegal drug users show lower academic achievement compared to nonusers Doing drugs can ruin your relationships with friends and loved ones because drugs can cause you to be paranoid and anti-social
Protection-Motivation Theory (Maddux & Rogers, 1963) Three key variables of influence: Danger likelihood (%) Coping Effectiveness (lower %?) Self-efficacy (Easy or hard?)
Elaboration-Likelihood Model The Peripheral Route Associative Learning Form associations between attitude object and descriptor: 1) Simple Association: Drugs/Bad 2) Complex Association: Serena & Venus say Say No to Drugs -> I like Serena & Venus -> I don t like drugs
Elaboration-Likelihood Model What determines the route we take? 1) Motivation: Involvement with ad subject. Long- (Ego-) or short-term (Situational). 2) Opportunity: Available mental (capacity) and physical (time) resources. Central route ONLY if BOTH HIGH Peripheral otherwise
ELM and MODE: Do the models connect? Wagner & Sundar: Automatic Activation of Drug Attitudes: Anti-drug Ad Viewing Styles and Strength of Association ELM: Peripheral = Associative Learning MODE: Associative Learning changes SOA H1: Drug SOA of participants who view anti-drug ads peripherally will be more negative than that of participants who watch them centrally.
Wagner & Sundar: SOA Means by Experimental Condition. (Lower Scores reflect more Drug/Negative associations).
Changing the Nature of Unreasoned Actions Wagner (2004) Wagner & Sundar (2003)
Product Placements: 1) Research shows memory effects but No Persuasion 2) Possibly because no explicitlystated brand messages 3) So, generally viewed peripherally, and should change SOA 4) Change should depend on relationship to TV program and character
Andriasova & Wagner: Are Product Placements Too Subtle to Persuade? SOA change but no self-report attitude change SOA predicted by TV Show and Character ratings, but self-reported attitudes were not.