Attitudes of Cognitive Organization

1. Attitudes of Cognitive Organization Fritz Heider (1946) The Journal of Psychology, 21, 107-112

2. Theory of attitudes and causal unit formation • Balance Theory- cognitive balance is the motivation behind attitude change. • “A tendency exists to make the different dynamic relations agree with each other by means of cognitive restructuring.” Heider develops a model to explain the relationship between: people, attitudes, events, ideas and object. Moreover, the organization of attitudes.

3. Terminology • P=Person • O=Other Person • X=Object • L=Positive Relation • ~L=Negative Relation • U=“unit”: similarity,proximity, ownership,causality, membership • ~U= not unit… “does not own” or did not cause

4. Hypotheses • “A balanced state exists if an entity has the same dynamic character in all possible respect” • “A balanced state exists if all parts of a unit have the same dynamic character” • “If no balanced state exists, then forces towards this state will arise…If a change is not possible, the state of imbalance will produce tension.”

5. Hypothesis part 1 • Internal cognitive balance of a person is dependent on the agreement of dynamic relations or attitudes. • Different dynamic relations are logically exclusive “p like o” does not mean “p admires o” • Psychological tendency for dynamic relation agreement is done through cognitive restructuring

6. Hypothesis 2 • A)Person and object/idea (P,X) • B)Two persons (P,O) • C)Two persons (P,O,X) • D)Three persons (P,O,Q) “A balanced state exists if all parts of a unit have the same dynamic character.” Hypothesis 2 deals with a person’s “life space”

7. Hypothesis 2A • Person and object • (PLX)+(PUX) or (P~LX)+(P~UX) When a person likes an object and is united with the object, there is balance. When a person hates and object and is separated from the object, there is balance.

8. Hypothesis 2B • Person and Other-person (P,O) • Balanced state with two people exists when(PLO)+(PUO) or (P~LO)+(P~UO) Bernie Like Kate, Bernie is not with Kate. Bernie does not like Kate, Bernie is not with Kate.

9. HYP2B Cont. • Symmetrical relation for “Unit” (U relation): PUO implies OUP • P is similar to O • PUO&OUP,however, will have different roles in unit. • P caused O means there is a causal relationship between P&O. However, only one person can be the causal unit. • NO symmetry for L relations • P likes O does not mean O likes P • However, psychologically there is a tendency toward symmetry.

10. 2nd Hypothesis, Section C • Three entities– two people and one item, or three people • Positive balance state • Exceptions: Envy and Jealousy • (pLo) + (pLx) + (oUx) • oUx may imply p~Ux if U means ownership • Marxian Implications?

11. 2nd Hypothesis, Section C (cont’d)Psychological Transitivity • Remember 7th grade math class? (a=b, b=c, then a=c) • L transitivity • Ex: There is a tendency of (pLx) if pLo and oLx hold • The psychological transitivity of L is often overcome in special cases of L and U (such as ownership or romantic love) • Ex: If oLx only because oUx (ownership) then it is less likely that pLx will tend to happen. • U transitivity • If not prevented by intervening L relation (generally weaker than L) • Ex: If pUo and oUx then there is a tendency for pUx (only if p~Lx doesn’t hold) • NOT Logical! A psychological tendency.

12. 2nd Hypothesis, Section C (cont’d) Triad Double Negativity • Balance can be established within the triad if two of the relations are negative and one positive. • Ex: (pLo) + (o~Lx) + (p~Ux) • Note: In such a balanced equation, L and U should be both exchangeable and transitive.

13. Hypothesis part 2 section D • Three People unit (P,O,Q) • PLO+OLQ+PLQ- is balanced among platonic friends. You want your friends to like your other friends. • Transitivity of L relations is restricted to 2 people in romantic love, which typically is between two people.

14. Self Evaluation • PLP= High self regard • P~LP=Low self regard • P in this unit is not equivalent, which sounds very Meadian. • P~LP could cause a person to reject a +X as punishment • Negative actions can cause P~LP

15. Equivalence of L & U • U relations are weaker than L relations • More often PUX produces PLX • PLO+OLX leads to transitivity of PLX • Bernie likes Kate. Kate likes Sex. Leads to Bernie liking Sex.

16. Weber Rationality • Not only can actions be affected by configuration. Means to ends can also be affected by balanced attitudes.

17. Structural Balance: A generalization of Heider’s Theory • Dorwin Cartwright and Frank Harary (1956) Psychological Review • Purpose: Make Heider’s theory more general in terms of empirical configurations. • Method: Mathematical theory of linear graphs. • Generate distinction between given relation and opposite relation.

18. 5 problems with Heider’s theory • Unsymmetrical relations • Empirical relations assume symmetry • Units containing more than three entities • What happens there is more that 3 entities? • Negative relations • L and U are inconsistent • ~L=dislike, ~U=lack or not unit (compliment/opposite) • ~U may NOT be negative • Relations of different type • U variations (simultaneous) and L balance • Cognitive fields and social systems • Studying balance in complex social systems like networks.

19. Structural Balance (S-Digraph) • L&U relations should have separate lines and directional lines • Degree of balance • Balance is now probabilistic • Situations with finite number of entities • Can be used in networks, power systems and other social systems.

20. Discussion Questions • Heider theory of balance focuses on the effects of positive or negative attitudes. How does a relatively neutral/indifferent attitude play into cognitive organization? • What happens to Heider's configuration when four or more entities are considered? (P,O,O2,X,X2) • The second part of the hypothesis states that balance is achieved (in triad configurations) with 3 positive in all respects or 2 negative and 1 positive. What is it to be "positive in all respects?” • How practical is Heider's theory in real social life? Are simple U and L configurations sufficient for understanding complex social life?

21. Cart-Right? Question • Professor Schutte characterized early cognitive psychology as thinking within a “black box.” Does Cartwright escape the black box with structural balance?