Chapter 7 attitudes
Download
1 / 31

Chapter 7: Attitudes - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 219 Views
  • Uploaded on

Chapter 7: Attitudes. Initial thoughts . Attitudes and expression of identity Identity function Utilitarian function Interdiscplinary analysis Behaviorism Other fields. Classic debate: attitude neutrality (?). Neutrality vs. Ambivalence vs. “No information” Measurement? Societal value

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'Chapter 7: Attitudes' - osias


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

Initial thoughts l.jpg
Initial thoughts

  • Attitudes and expression of identity

    • Identity function

    • Utilitarian function

  • Interdiscplinary analysis

    • Behaviorism

    • Other fields


Classic debate attitude neutrality l.jpg
Classic debate: attitude neutrality (?)

  • Neutrality vs. Ambivalence vs. “No information”

    • Measurement?

  • Societal value

  • Possible?


Why neutrality is difficult l.jpg
Why Neutrality is Difficult

  • #1 Automaticity of attitudes


2 mere exposure effect l.jpg
#2: mere exposure effect

  • Zajonc (1968)

    • The “Turkish word” study

      • e.g., saricik, kadirga, ikitaf

      • 0, 1, 2, 5, 10, or 25 exposures

      • pronounce aloud each time

      • Guess good vs. bad meaning


Moreland and zajonc 1973 l.jpg
Moreland and Zajonc (1973)

  • Subliminal presentation (4 ms)

  • Test phase:

    • “old” vs. and “new” symbols

    • Recognition task: chance level

    • Liking: old symbols preferred


Additional information about mere exposure effect l.jpg
Additional information about mere exposure effect

  • The effects of repeated exposure depend on initial appraisal of the stimulus

Initially liked, or neutral: increased liking, but:

Initially disliked: increased disliking


Classic problems in attitude measurement l.jpg
Classic Problems in Attitude Measurement

  • Response alternatives not appropriate

  • Acquiescence (yea-saying) biases

  • Framing


Slide9 l.jpg

  • Examples

  • Abortion

    • Pro-life vs. pro-choice; “fetus” vs. “unborn child”, etc…

  • Cloning

    • “What is your attitude toward research on animal cloning?”

    • “If research on animal cloning could be used to advance our ability to prevent cancer, would you be in favor of such research?”


Slide10 l.jpg

4. Social desirability effects (Goffman, 1959).

Social desirability

“true” attitude

Fundamental problem: “how much” of response is due to one factor or other.


Classic older approaches l.jpg
“Classic” (older) approaches

  • Vary context in which responses are made

  • The “Bogus Pipeline” (Jones & Sigall, 1971)

    • Participants “practice” on machine, to convince that can detect truth from lying

    • Then asked to express honest attitudes toward mix of new attitudes, some mundane, some socially sensitive


Older approaches continued l.jpg
Older approaches, continued

  • Disguise/mask what’s being asked

    • “Symbolic” attitudes

Overtly expressed attitude A2

Underlying attitude A1

(socially unacceptable )


Examples of symbolic attitudes kinder 1986 l.jpg
examples of “symbolic” attitudes (Kinder, 1986)

  • “____ students receive too much financial assistance from the university” (Boneicki, 1998)

  • “Discrimination against Blacks is a thing of the past” (McConahay, 1986)

  • “Downtown St. Louis has too much crime”

Potential advantages vs. disadvantages?

Tradeoff: efforts to disguise question threaten construct validity


Newer approach implicit attitudes l.jpg
Newer approach: Implicit Attitudes

  • Attitude object (prime)  target

    • Presentation of prime assumed to facilitate or inhibit response to the target

    • Semantic priming

      • “chocolate” “food” (semantic priming)

    • Evaluative priming

      • “chocolate”  “good” (direct)

      • “chocolate”  “flower” (indirect)

      • “chocolate”  “disgusting”


Types of implicit priming tasks l.jpg
Types of implicit priming tasks

Lexical decision tasks: decide whether target is a word or not

“Word or non-word?”

prime

target

decision

response

chocolate

“good”

RT measured

xxxxxxxx

“good”

response


Lexical decision tasks continued l.jpg
Lexical decision tasks, continued

  • Construct facilitation indices

    • RT (xxxxx  good) – RT (chocolate good)

    • (500 milliseconds) - (200 milliseconds) = 300 ms

    • 300 ms represents implicit attitude index


Evaluative decision tasks l.jpg
Evaluative decision tasks

  • Very similar to lexical decision, but judgmental decision different

Is it a good or a bad word?

prime

target

decision

desirable

response

chocolate

desirable

response

xxxxxx



Summary l.jpg
Summary

  • If “A” and “B” are associated in memory, then presenting A should make B more accessible

  • Consequences of accessibility: faster to decide if B is

    • a word (lexical decision)

    • positive or negative (evaluative decision)


Why implicit attitudes potentially interesting l.jpg
Why implicit attitudes potentially interesting

  • Potential dissociation

  • Conscious vs. unconscious

  • Implicit attitudes less “contaminated” by self-presentational bias (?)

  • Implicit attitudes “purer” measures of true attitudes (???)


Strong argument separate systems view l.jpg
Strong argument:separate systems view

Implicit

tasks

Automatic (unconscious) system

Controlled (conscious) system

Explicit

tasks


The critics speak l.jpg
The critics speak

  • “just another attitude measure”

  • predictive validity?

    • see Lambert, Payne, Shaffer, & Ramsey (2005)

  • assumptions may be incorrect

    • strong correlations sometimes found

    • controllability of reactions to implicit tasks?

  • “No such thing as a process-pure measure”

    • Larry Jacoby

    • No task 100% automatic

    • No task 100% controlled


More realistic view l.jpg
More realistic view?

Implicit

tasks

Automatic system

Explicit

tasks

Controlled system



Historical background l.jpg
Historical Background

  • The James Vicary incident (late 1950s)

    • Popcorn sales increase by 50%, he says.

  • Media reaction:

    • Minds have been “broken and entered” (The New Yorker, 9/21/57)

    • “The most alarming and outrageous discovery” since the invention of the machine gun (The Nation, 10/5/57)

  • FCC bans subliminal advertising


  • People s current views toward subliminal vs regular advertising l.jpg
    People’s current views toward subliminal vs. “regular” advertising:

    • Subliminal ads feared more, believed to be more effective (Wilson et al. 1998)

    • Subliminal self-help tapes

      • $50 million as of 1990


    Evidence l.jpg
    Evidence?

    • Vicary’s claims: fabricated!

    • No evidence that subliminal advertising works in real-life contexts

    • Note: Regular advertising EXTREMELY powerful, but people believe that they are immune to it (Wilson & Brekke, 1994)


    Subliminal influence in laboratory settings growing evidence l.jpg
    Subliminal influence in laboratory settings—growing evidence


    So why no evidence yet that subliminal advertising works outside of the laboratory l.jpg
    So why no evidence (yet) that subliminal advertising works outside of the laboratory?

    • “Noisy” contexts?

    • Temporal distance?

    • Fixed attitudes hard to change?

    • Maybe does exist, just harder to measure


    Could subliminal priming be used to enhance self esteem l.jpg
    Could subliminal priming be used to enhance self-esteem?

    • “I like myself, but I don’t know why: Enhancing implicit self esteem by subliminal evaluative conditioning” (Dijksterhuis, 2004)

    • Modified lexical decision task

    • The word “I” presented for 17 milliseconds, followed by…

      • 50% trials: positive adjectives (e.g. Warm, sweet, nice, sincere, honest, beautiful, cheerful, smart, strong, wise, healthy, funny, nice)

      • 50% trials: non words

    • Control participants: positive adjectives replaced with neutral words (e.g. table)

    • Results show enhanced self-esteem, immunity to failure feedback

      • Replicates across six experiments


    Slide31 l.jpg

    Bush says 'RATS' ad not meant as subliminal message

    Gore calls ad 'disappointing development'

    September 12, 2000Web posted at: 9:04 p.m. EDT (0104 GMT)

    ORLANDO, Florida (CNN) -- Republican presidential nominee George W. Bush said Tuesday he was "convinced" an ad placed by the Republican National Committee that flashes the word "RATS" over a Gore prescription drug proposal was not intended to send a subliminal message.

    "We don't need to play cute politics. We're going to win this election based upon issues," Bush told reporters in Orlando.

    Democratic presidential nominee Al Gore's campaign contacted news organizations about an RNC ad in which the word "RATS" appears briefly on screen in a spot that criticizes Gore's prescription drug plan. A spokesman for the Texas governor on Tuesday brushed aside suggestions of subliminal advertising as "bizarre and weird," while the RNC had no immediate comment.


    ad