ATTITUDE

Social behaviour is a necessary part of human life, and being social means much more than
being social in the company of others. Because of social influences peoples form views or
attitudes about other people. When we meet other people we make influences about their
personal qualities.This is called impression formation. We are also interested in why people
behave in the way they do - that is, we assign causes to the behaviour shown in specific
social situations. This process is called attributes. Very often impression formation and
attributions are influenced by attitude. These three processes are examples of mental
activities related to gathering and interpretation of information about social work collectively
called social cognition. Moreover social cognition is activated by cognitive units called
schemas. cognitive processes cannot be directly seen; they have to be inferred on the basis of
externally shown behaviour.

There are other examples of social influence that are in the form of observable behaviour.
Two such examples are social facilitation/inhibition, that is, the improvement/ decline in
performance in the presence of others, and helping, or pro-social behaviour.

NATURE AND COMPONENTS OF ATTITUDES

Attitude is a state of the mind, a set of views, or thoughts regarding some topic which have an
evaluative feature (positive, negative or neutral quality). It is accompanied by an emotional
component and a tendency to act in a particular way with regards to the attitude object.
The thought component is referred to as the cognitive aspect, the emotional competent is
known as the affective aspect, and the tendency to act is called the behavioural (or conative)
aspect. Taken together these three aspects have been referred to as the ABC components (
affective-behavioral-cognitive components) of attitude. Attitude itself is not behaviour, but
represents a tendency to behave or act in certain ways. They are part of cognition along with
an emotional component and cannot be observed from outside.

Attitudes have been distinguished from two other closely related concepts, namely beliefs
and values. Beliefs refer to the cognitive components of attitudes, and form the ground on
which attitudes stand such as belief in God or belief in democracy as a political ideology.
Values are attitudes or beliefs that contain a ‘should’ or ‘ought’ aspect such as moral or
ethical values. Values are formed when a particular belief or attitude becomes an inseparable
part of a person's outlook on life. Consequently, values are difficult to change.

In addition to the affective, cognitive and behavioral component, attitudes also have other
properties. Four significant features of attitudes are: valence (positivity on negativity),
extremeness, simplicity or complexity (multiplexity) and centrality.

Valence (positivity or negativity) : ​The valence of an attitude tells us whether an attitude is

positive or negative towards the attitude object. Example, suppose an attitude (say towards
nuclear research) has to be expressed on a 5 point scale ranging from 1 (very bad), 2 (bad), 3
(neutral-neither good or bad) and 4 (good), to 5 (very good). If an individual rates his/ her
attitude towards nuclear research as 4 or 5, this is clearly a positive attitude. This means that
the person likes the idea of nuclear research.On the other hand, if the rating is 1 or 2 attitude
is negative. This means that the person dislikes the idea of nuclear research. In this example a
neutral attitude towards nuclear research would be shown by rating 3 on the same scale. A
neutral attitude would have neither positive nor negative valence.

Extremeness: ​The extremeness of an attitude indicates how positive or negative an attitude

is. Taking the nuclear research example given above A rating of 1 is extreme as the rating of
5; they are only in the opposite directions (valence). Ratings of 2 and 4 are less extreme and
neutral attitude is of course, the lowest on extremeness.

Simplicity or complexity ( Multiplexity): ​This feature refers to how many attitudes there
are within a broader attitude. Think of an attitude as a family containing several members and
attitudes In case of various topics such as health and world peace, people hold many attitudes
instead of a single attitude. An attitude system is said to be (simple) if it contains only one or
few attitudes and (complex) if it is made up of many attitudes.

Centrality: ​This refers to the role of a particular attitude in the attitude system. An attitude
with greater centrality would influence the other attitudes in the system much more than non
central or peripheral attitude would. For example, in the attitude towards world peace a
negative attitude towards high military expenditure may be present as a core or central
attitude that influences all other attitudes in the multiple attitudes system.

Attitudes are an important topic of study for social psychologists. In this lesson, we define
attitudes and discuss their three components as illustrated by the ABC Model: affective,
behavioral and cognitive.

Attitudes and the ABC Model

A psychological tendency that is expressed by evaluating a particular entity with some degree
of favor or disfavor

Allport (1935) defined an attitude as a mental or neural state of readiness, organized through
experience, exerting a directive or dynamic influence on the individual's response to all
objects and situations to which it is related. We communicate our attitudes in the form of
statements such as: “I like mangoes”, “I enjoy classical music”, or "I do not enjoy rock
music” When we use words such as 'like', 'dislike', 'love', 'hate', 'good and bad we are
describing our attitude towards objects, people or issues.

ATTITUDE OBJECT
The thing (e.g. idea, person, behaviour) that is accorded a favourable or unfavourable
attitude.

Affectively Based Attitude

An attitude based more on people's feelings and values than on beliefs about the nature of an
object.
Cognitively Based Attitude An attitude based primarily on people's beliefs about the
properties of an attitude object.
Behaviorally Based Attitude An attitude based on observations of how we behave toward an
object.
Some examples
· I believe that the pact will be good for the environment (cognition);
· I feel excited when she hears plans for the pact (emotion); and
· I will sign a petition supporting the pact (behaviour).

Do you believe that God exists? What's your opinion on politics? What are your favorite
pizza toppings? These questions may be seemingly unrelated, but it's likely you have strong
opinions about all three of these topics. Developing opinions and forming likes and dislikes
about everything around us are part of our daily lives. These attitudes affect the way we live
and the choices we make.

Attitudes​ can be defined as evaluations of ideas, events, objects, or people. Attitudes are
generally positive or negative, but they can also be uncertain at times. For example,
sometimes we have mixed feelings about a particular issue or person. Regardless, attitudes
are an important topic of study for social psychologists because they help determine what we
do - what we eat, how we vote, what we do with our free time, and so on.

Every attitude has three components that are represented in what is called the ​ABC model of
attitudes​: A for affective, B for behavioral, and C for cognitive. Although every attitude has
these three components, any particular attitude can be based on one component more than
another.

In other words, each component can also be the answer to the question: where does an
attitude come from? There are affectively-based attitudes, behaviorally-based attitudes, and
cognitively-based attitudes. Let's take a closer look at some examples.

Affective Component

The snake is an attitude object eliciting fear in some individuals.

First, the ​affective​ component refers to the emotional reaction one has toward an attitude
object. Think of someone - we'll name her Alice - who has ​ophidiophobia​ (a ​phobia​ of
snakes). A snake is an attitude object. Whenever Alice is exposed to a snake - whether she
sees one or thinks about one - she feels extreme anxiety and fear. This is only one component
of this specific attitude, though; we will discuss the other two components a little later in this
lesson.
Political attitudes are typically
affectively-based.

Now, an attitude that is stemmed from or originally created by an emotion is called an

affectively-based attitude. Attitudes about hot-button issues - such as politics, sex, and
religion - tend to be affectively-based, as they usually come from a person's values. This type
of attitude is used to express and validate our moral belief or value systems.

Behavioral Component

The next component of an attitude is the ​behavioral​ component, and it refers to the way one
behaves when exposed to an attitude object. Think about Alice and her snake phobia again.
We already identified the affective component of her attitude towards snakes - fear and
anxiety. How do you think she behaves when it comes to snakes? Most likely, she avoids
them whenever possible. If she does see one, she probably screams or cries. This behavior is
the second component of that particular attitude.

As for attitudes that are rooted in behavior, think again about the question: where does an
attitude come from? Sometimes, we are unsure of our feelings about a particular topic.
Imagine a friend asks if you like hummus. Since you don't regularly eat hummus and can't
immediately recall what it tastes like, you think back about the times that you have eaten it.
You remember that you normally eat all of the hummus you are given, so conclude that you
must like it (or at least, that you don't dislike it). Because your attitude is determined by
observing your own behavior, this is an example of a behaviorally-based attitude.

Cognitive Component

The third and final component of an attitude is the ​cognitive​ component, and it refers to the
thoughts and beliefs one has about an attitude object. We've already determined that Alice
avoids snakes and is scared when she is exposed to them. But, what does she think about
snakes? It's likely she believes that all snakes are dangerous and gross. Beyond the physical
and emotional reactions of her phobia, there is also this cognitive component of her attitude.

Attitudes based on facts, such as computer speed, are cognitively-based.

An attitude that is constructed primarily through facts instead of emotions or observations of

our behavior is a cognitively-based attitude. For example, what is your attitude towards your
computer? It's likely based on facts and figures, such as how fast it is and what programs you
have installed. Although this may result in an emotion (such as frustration), your attitude isn't
based on emotion - it's based on your thoughts of the properties of the object.

TYPES OF ATTITUDES

Attitudes: Explicit vs. Implicit

Part of what makes each one of us unique is our combination of opinions and attitudes about
the world around us. Every day, our attitudes about ideas, events, objects or people help
determine the way we live and the choices we make. In another lesson, we discuss the fact
that attitudes have affective, behavioral and cognitive components. We also discuss the fact
that attitudes can stem from each of these components. Once an attitude is formed, though,
how is it manifested? Unless someone tells us, how do we know someone's attitude toward
something?

Interestingly, an attitude can actually exist at two different levels. Explicit attitudes are
attitudes that are at the conscious level, are deliberately formed and are easy to self-report.
On the other hand, implicit attitudes are attitudes that are at the unconscious level, are
involuntarily formed and are typically unknown to us.

Imagine you're out with some friends and meet someone new. This new acquaintance is
wearing a Dallas Cowboys jersey, and they happen to be your favorite team. You decide you
already like this person and start a friendly conversation. From an attitude perspective, you
consciously noticed the jersey and determined that this was obviously someone with which
you would get along. Your attitude is at the conscious level, was deliberately formed and you
are able to tell someone else about your attitude.

Now, imagine the same scene. You are out with your friends. You vaguely notice some of the
strangers around you but don't meet anyone. You talk with your friends but feel extremely
uncomfortable. Maybe your friend even notices and asks what's wrong, but you have no idea.
In this scenario, it would be possible that one of the strangers near you reminds you of
someone from your past that you greatly disliked. Your attitude towards this person is what is
making you feel uncomfortable. However, the attitude is at the unconscious level, was
involuntarily formed, and you have no idea it's there, so you couldn't tell anyone about it.

It is possible and quite common for an explicit attitude and an implicit attitude to contradict
each other. Prejudice is a frequently used example. Imagine Greg, a middle-class white man
who genuinely believes that all races are equal and despises any kind of racial bias. This is
Greg's explicit attitude. He is aware of his strong opinion and can easily share this with
others. Yet, he is unaware that any time he is around Hispanics, he acts rather nervous. If
Greg grew up in a small town with strong negative stereotypes about Hispanic people, it's
possible that some of these negative ideas influenced him without his knowledge. He may
subconsciously believe that Hispanics are dangerous. This is Greg's contradicting implicit
attitude. It was involuntarily created, and he is not aware of it.

Measuring Explicit Attitudes

So, again, how do we know someone's attitude toward a particular subject? In the real world,
how do we determine Greg's attitude about Hispanics? The answer to this question is a source
of some debate, but a variety of methods have been created to measure attitudes both explicit
and implicit.

Because explicit attitudes are known to the subject and can be observed by an outsider,
self-reporting and observation are the two most common methods to determine explicit
attitudes. The biggest advantage for both methods is the ease of collecting the data. However,
neither measure is infallible. For example, although self-reporting seems to be mostly
accurate, we must assume that each subject is highly ​self-aware​ and honest, which may not
always be the case.

Measuring Implicit Attitudes

Measuring implicit attitudes is much more difficult than measuring explicit attitudes. After
all, the implicit attitude is unknown to the subject. One popular method of determining
implicit attitudes is the Implicit Association Test (IAT), in which subjects quickly categorize
words or pictures, and the results are used to determine automatic associations between
concepts and attributes.

Imagine Greg was taking an IAT. He would have to categorize a long list of words and/or
pictures very quickly. The amount of time for each word and/or picture would be so brief that
he would not have time to think; the categorization would be from his automatic reactions. If
he categorized Hispanic people or communities under negative attributes (bad, dangerous,
etc.) before he had a chance to think about it, this would suggest a negative implicit attitude
towards Hispanics.

The use of the IAT is a subject of controversy, because many question its internal validity,
particularly when it comes to measuring racial prejudice. Skeptics say the test merely
demonstrates the tendency for all of us to prefer our in-group and have the most positive
associations with people who are similar to us. In other words, the IAT validates a part of
human nature instead measuring individual racial prejudice.

ATTITUDE STRUCTURE
Three component model states that beliefs, feelings, and behaviour towards an object can
influence attitude towards it and that these attitudes can reciprocally influence the
beliefs,feelings and behaviour.

● Gun control
 ● Affect: “Guns make me sick!”
● Behaviour: “I vote for gun control whenever possible.”
● Cognition: “Guns in the house increase the likelihood of children accidentally
shooting themselves.”
● This example illustrates the three component model of attitude structure which states
that beliefs, feelings and behaviour form three distinct types of psychological
information that are closely tied to attitudes.
● It has been found that attitudes are held for a long period of time.
● Attitudes change especially when you undergo new experiences.
● Also they are characteristics of a person, and differ in type and strength from person
to person depending upon the socialization and interaction with the social world.
● Why do we form attitudes?
● Attitudes are useful because they help people to master the social environment and to
express important connections with others.
● Attitudes are assembled from beliefs, feelings and information about actions toward
the object.
ATTITUDE FUNCTIONS
● The purpose of attitude is to mediate between a person's internal needs (e.g. For
safety, self expression, etc.) and the external environment, full of people and
information.
● According to Katz, attitudes serve four important functions from the viewpoint of
organisational behaviour.
● the adaptive or instrumental function
● the knowledge function
● the value expressive or ego expressive function
● the ego defence function.
● Attitudes allow us to understand the world around us. Positive attitudes help to come
closer to some people and make you agree to their requests. You may identify with
role models, for example, Sachin Tendulkar, Mother Teresa and try to develop their
way of thinking and behaving. The negative attitudes make us stay away from such
people or situations.
● Attitudes help describe the social group that each one of us belongs to. As members of
a family, group of friends, or religious, political group we share similar attitudes and
this helps to bind us together.Thus we may favour the religious and political group we
belong to and show an unfavourable attitude towards the other groups.
● Attitudes also help us to understand who we are or our identity. Attitudes express an
individual’s values and self concept. For example, some people value equality and
while others may value freedom or compassion. Mahatma Gandhi's attitude towards
honesty and Mother Teresa’s concern for the poor and needy is well known.
● Attitudes help us to get support, praise and acceptance from others. People who hold
similar attitudes are attracted towards each other.For example, your friend and you
share common interests and attitudes both of you like each other and hence it makes it
 easier to carry on the friendship. Thus attitudes help us to adjust in our social
interaction.
● Adjustment function: The Adjustment function directs people towards pleasurable or
rewarding objects and away from unpleasant undesirable ones. It serves the utilitarian
concept of maximizing reward and minimising punishment.
● Knowledge attitudes provide meaning (knowledge) for life. Knowledge function
refers to a need for a world which is consistent and relatively stable. This allows us to
predict what is likely to happen and so, gives us a sense of control. Attitudes can help
us organise and structure our experience. Knowing a person's attitude helps us predict
their behaviour. For example, knowing that a person is religious we can predict they
will go to church.
● Ego defensive: some attitudes serve to protect us from acknowledging basic truths
about ourselves or the harsh realities of life. They served as defence mechanisms.
Examples: those with feelings of inferiority may develop an attitude of superiority.
Holding attitudes that protect our self-esteem or that justify actions that make us feel
guilty.
● Self / ego expressive: The attitudes we express help us communicate who we are and
may make us feel good because we have asserted our identity.
● Self expression of attitude can be non verbal too; think of bumper stickers, caps or
t-shirt slogans.
Therefore attitudes are a part of our identity and help us to be aware through expression of
our feelings, beliefs and values.

ATTITUDE FORMATION
Where do attitudes come from?
● Attitude formation is a result of learning, modelling others and our direct experiences
with people and situations.
● Attitudes influence our decisions, guide our behaviour and impact what we selectively
remember (not always the same as what we hear).
● Attitudes come in different strengths, and like most things that are known or
influenced by experience they can be measured and they can be changed​. ​Are you as
religious as your grandparents and parents?
● Attitudes are the result of many different influences yet the common aspect is that it is
acquired through different types of learning.
● Direct contact
● Direct instruction
● Interaction with others
● Observational learning
● Unconscious Motivation
● Rational Analysis
● Direct contact: a neutral object gets associated with an established stimulus-response.
Repeated association with the stimuli evokes positive or negative feelings. The
attitude object now comes to have the same feelings.
● This involves classical conditioning..... Strong smells, tastes and sensory information
can bring about strong emotional responses. For example, if a child eats sprouts and
dislikes it, there are chances that this dislike will be generalized to other food items
similar in color and taste.
● Direct instruction: Instructions given by parents, teachers, or leaders, lead to
formation of specific attitudes.
● For example, Parents tell their children not to smoke and drink because it is
unhealthy. Teachers may also reinforce this attitude. The child may develop a
negative attitude towards smoking and drinking.
● Interaction with others: We are usually in the company of others
● and adopt attitudes similar to the group we belong to.
● For example, If your friends think it cool to smoke and drink then you may not listen
to your parents and teachers but agree with the peer group. You choose such a way of
behaving, as this behavior is reinforced by the reward you get from your friends, that
is, praise, approval and acceptance as a group member. Further, such actions make
you 'feel good, increase your self esteem and make your attitude even stronger. The
use of rewards involves instrumental learning. By controlling rewards and
punishments children are taught specific attitudes.
● Observational learning: Attitudes are often learnt through observation of other
people's actions.
● As a young adult you may also now enjoy how your mother reacts when she sees a
stray dog? Or, how did she show fear and an attempt to run away from the dog, it is
likely that you may also have developed the same attitude.
● In addition, the educational system, media particularly television, movies, magazines
and newspapers all influence attitude formation Belonging to an impressionable age
children believe in what they watch on the TV. Advertisers take advantage of this and
try to get children to form specific attitudes towards what they want to sell. Almost all
companies and organizations spend a lot of money on advertisement aimed at
persuading people for change in their attitude
● Unconscious Motivation: Some attitudes are held because they serve some
unconscious function for an individual. For example, a person who is threatened by
his homosexual feelings may employ the defense mechanism of reaction formation
and become a crusader against homosexuals.
● Or, someone who feels inferior may feel somewhat better by putting down a group
other than her own. Because it is unconscious, the person will not be aware of the
unconscious motivation at the time it is operative, but may become aware of it at
some later point in time.
● Rational Analysis: Rational analysis involves the careful weighing of evidence for,
and against, a particular attitude. For example, a person may carefully listen to the
 presidential debates and read opinions of political experts in order to decide which
candidate to vote for in an election.

HOW DO ATTITUDES ACTUALLY PREDICT BEHAVIOR?

Two theoretical models that explain why attitudes predict
behavior.
● Theory of Reasoned Action/ Planned Behavior: - Theory relevant when the behavior
is thoughtfully planned in advance.
● Attitude-To-Behavior Process Model - Theory relevant when behavior is a
spontaneous reaction to one's immediate situation.
● According to this Theory Of Reasoned Action a person's behavior is determined by its
behavioral intention to perform it. This intention is itself determined by the person's
attitudes and his subjective norms towards the behavior. Subjective norms as "the
person's perception that most people who are important to him think he should or
should not perform the behavior in question
PLANNED BEHAVIOR
● This theory can be summarized by the following equation: Behavioral Intention =
Attitude + Subjective norms.
Example
● Attitudes: An individual's beliefs about the attributes and outcomes of using tobacco
(or quitting), weighted by their evaluations of these attributes or outcomes.
● Subjective Norms: an individual's beliefs regarding important others' approval or
disapproval of tobacco use (normative beliefs), weighted by their motivation to
comply with these important others' wishes.
● Perceived Behavioral Control: An individual's perceived control over tobacco use in
the presence or absence of facilitators and barriers to quitting.
● In general, according to this model, the more positive the attitude and the subjective
norms are (towards cessation), and the greater the perceived control is, the stronger
the individual's intention will be to terminate tobacco use.
Fazio proposed a model of the Attitude-to-behavior Process. - Spontaneous Behavior
● In this model, behaviors stem from individuals' perceptions of an attitude object and a
situation in which the attitude object is encountered.
● The degree to which people's attitudes guide their subsequent perceptions of and
behavior towards the attitude object is moderated by attitude accessibility.
Attitude Accessibility
● Attitude accessibility concerns how quickly an attitude is activated from → memory.
● Attitudes that are more accessible from memory are more predictive of behavior,
influence what messages are attended to, how those messages are processed, and are
more stable across time.
● Suppose you see a spider - you might have a very quick "yuck" response. The fast
yuck response indicates an accessible attitude toward spiders. You do not have to
think about whether you like spiders, rather, the mere presence of a spider results in
the activation of your attitude.
● On the other hand, imagine you are walking down a sidewalk with a friend looking
for a place to eat. Your friend points to a Chinese restaurant and suggests you try it. In
this instance, you may have to think about whether you like Chinese food, because
you are not sure what you think of it, before deciding that it is good.
● The fact that you have to ponder whether you like something suggests that either you
have a relatively inaccessible attitude or you have never formed an attitude toward
that object.
 ● Our behavior and our expressed attitudes differ because both are subject to other
influences.
● Knowing that people don't wear their hearts on their sleeves, social, psychologists
have longed for a "pipeline to the heart.”
● Edward Jones and Harold Sigall therefore devised a bogus pipeline method that fools
people into exposing their real attitude.
● bogus pipeline is a procedure that fools people into disclosing their attitudes.
● Participants are first convinced that a machine can use their psychological responses
to measure their private attitudes.
● Then they are asked to predict the machine's reading, thus revealing their attitudes.

BOGUS PIPELINE EXPERIMENT

● Perhaps you are a psychologist, and you wish to do a study on racism. Maybe you
want to know whether racists drink more coffee than non racists. Sounds easy. Find a
group of people and ask them how racist they are, then ask them how much coffee
they drink.
● Problem: everyone in your study says they're completely non-racist and some of their
best friends are black and all races are equally part of this vast multicolored tapestry
we call humanity. Maybe some of them are stretching the truth here a bit. Until you
figure out which ones, you're never going to find out anything interesting about
coffee.
● So you build a foreboding looking machine out of gleaming steel, covered with wires
and blinking lights. You sit your subjects down in front of the machine, connect them
to its electrodes, and say as convincingly as possible that it is a lie detector and they
must speak the truth. Your subjects look doubtful. Didn't they hear on TV that lie
detectors don't really work? They'll stick to their vehement assertions of tolerance
until you get a more impressive looking machine, thank you. You get smarter. Before
your experiment, you make the subjects fill in a survey, which you secretly copy
while they're not looking. Then you bring them in front of the gleaming metal lie
detector, and dare them to try to thwart it. Every time they give an answer different
from the one on the survey, you frown and tell them that the machine has detected
their fabrication. When the subject is suitably impressed, you start asking them about
racism.
● The subjects start grudgingly admitting they have some racist attitudes. You have
invented the Bogus Pipeline.
ATTITUDE CHANGE
● • Attitude change refers to a modification of individuals general
● evaluative perception of a stimulus or a set of stimuli.
● One of the earliest fields of study in social psychology focused on persuasion, the
changing of people's attitudes through communication. Research in this field has
found that there are two basic routes to persuasion, a central route that emphasizes the
content of a message and systematic deliberate processing of information, and
 ● a peripheral route that emphasizes more rules of thumb or heuristic processing of
information.
● The source of a message, its content, and the audience that hears the message all
affects whether the message will be persuasive.
Two influential theories, Chaiken's heuristic-systematic persuasion model, and Petty and
Cacioppo's elaboration likelihood models have tried to specify when people will be more it
and when they will be more influenced by superficial characteristics of the message.
● The theory also suggests that processing of any message must occur in stages if it is to
be successful.
● The intended audience must:
1. pay attention to the message,
2. comprehend the message, and
3. accept the message's conclusions.
● People are also persuaded by their own actions and the roles that they play.
● Cognitive dissonance theory maintains that when people engage in an action that
conflicts with their attitudes they will feel tension, and that the easiest way to reduce
this tension is to change their attitude. In this way, the theory predicts that people will
change their attitudes to match their behavior.

Persuasive Communications and Attitude Change : The Central & Peripheral Routes

Heuristic-systematic model of persuasion: the theory that there are two ways in which
persuasive communications can cause attitude change:
i) people either process the merits of the arguments, known as systematic processing,
or
 ii) use mental shortcuts (heuristics) such as “Experts are always right", known as
heuristic processing.

Elaboration likelihood model: the theory that there are two ways in which persuasive
communications can cause attitude change:

i) the central route occurs when people are motivated and have the ability to pay
attention to the arguments in the communication
ii) the peripheral route occurs when people do not pay attention to the arguments but
are instead swayed by surface characteristics (e.g., who gave the speech).

WHAT DETERMINES WHETHER A PERSON WILL TAKE THE CENTRAL VS

THE PERIPHERAL ROUTE TO PERSUASION?

The key, according to both theorists, Petty & Chaiken, is whether people have the motivation
and ability to pay attention to the facts.
People who are interested, motivated, and have the ability to pay attention to the arguments
are more likely to take the central route

Motivation to Attend to Arguments

● One determinant of whether people are motivated to pay attention to a communication

is the personal relevance of the topic i.e., the extent to which a topic has important
consequences for a person's well-being, student fees, pension benefits).
● The more personally relevant an issue is, the more willing people are to take pay
attention to the arguments in a speech, and thus more likely to take the central route to
persuasion
● Thus, when an issue is personally relevant, people will pay attention to the arguments
of the speech and will be persuaded to the extent that the arguments are sound (central
route to persuasion).
● When an issue is of low personal relevance people will not pay as close attention to
the arguments. Instead, they will take a mental shortcut, following such peripheral
rules as 'Prestigious speakers can be trusted.' (Peripheral route)
● People's motivation to listen carefully to message content also depends on their
personality, their need for cognition.
● Need for Cognition: a personality variable reflecting the extent to which people
engage in and enjoy effortful cognitive activities.
● People high in need for cognition are more likely to form attitudes by paying close
attention to relevant arguments (central route), whereas
● People low in the need for cognition rely on peripheral cues when forming attitudes.

ABILITY TO PAY ATTENTION

 ● The route to attitude change also depends on people's ability to pay attention to, and
to understand the arguments.
● The more distracted people are, or the more difficult it is for them to understand the
arguments, the more likely it is that they will take the peripheral route
Mood
● When people are in a positive mood, persuasion is more likely to occur via the
peripheral route; they are less likely to analyze a message carefully than when they
are in a negative mood.
● They want to preserve the good mood so they will avoid any activity that might spoil
it.
● People in a sad, or neutral mood are more likely to take the central route, to analyze
each argument in detail.

THE IMPORTANCE OF CENTRAL PROCESSING

Why is central processing so important in attitude formation?

Because, people who base their attitudes on a careful analysis of the arguments are:
● more likely to maintain this attitude over time
● more likely to behave consistently with this attitude
● more resistant to counter-persuasion than people who base their attitudes on
peripheral cues.
 ● A situation. Jessica is a sports fanatic and captain of her school's volleyball and
basketball teams. While watching one of her favorite shows, she sees a commercial
for a new pair of shoes that claim to provide extra heel support and increase the height
of her jump. The commercial also provides laboratory findings from three
independent studies that support the commercial's claims about the shoes. Jessica
decides that having the shoes will improve her performance, so she goes to the mall to
purchase her very own pair.
● In this example, the commercial persuaded Jessica to purchase the shoes using the
central route to persuasion.
● The central route to persuasion occurs when a person is persuaded to act based on the
arguments or the content of the message.
● A situation. Liam is a 7-year-old who loves to watch cartoons and play video games.
While out grocery shopping with his mother, Liam sees a poster advertising a new
vegetable drink for kids. The poster says that the drink will improve your immune
system and help you achieve optimal health. Liam does not quite understand what
optimum health or your immune system is, so he pays the advertisement very little
attention. However, Liam's views change once he walks further down the aisle and
sees another poster of his favorite cartoon character drinking the vegetable drink.
Liam then rushes to his mother and asks her to purchase the drink for him, to which
she agrees.
● Liam was persuaded to purchase the drink by the peripheral route to persuasion,
which occurs when a person is persuaded to act based on something other than the
arguments or content of a message.
Comparison of central route processing and peripheral route processing.

Aspect Central Route Processing Peripheral route

processing

Elaboration High Low

Information processing Contents of the message are Receiver is influenced by

closely examined by the other factors apart from the
receiver contents of the message

Attitude Will change or be reinforced Might change or be

based on message reinforced based on
characteristics such as effectiveness of factors other
strength of arguments or than the message
relevancy

Strength of attitude formed/ More enduring and less Less enduring and subject to
reinforced subject to counter arguments change through future
persuasive messages
RESISTING PERSUASION
● Inoculation: Practice can be the best resistance medicine.
● Attitude inoculation is a technique used to make people immune to attempts to change
their attitude by first exposing them to small arguments against their position. It is so
named because it works just like medical inoculation, which exposes a person's body
to a weak version of a virus. The weakened virus triggers the production of antibodies
in response, but it is not strong enough to overwhelm the body's resistance. Later,
when exposed to the full vírus, the body knows what to expect and is better able to
resist than it would have been before the inoculation.
● involves building up defenses against persuasion by mildly attacking the attitude
position
● For example, one reason that product placement in a TV show or movie works is
because people do not realize that someone is trying to influence them. If we are
aware of the use of product placement as advertisement, we are likely to avoid
attitude change as a result of this awareness. An even more effective method of
resisting persuasion that expands upon simple awareness of persuasion techniques is
attitude inoculation.

WHAT IS ATTITUDE
INOCULATION?
 ● Attitude inoculation ​is a technique used to make people immune to attempts to
change their attitude by first exposing them to small arguments against their
position. It is so named because it works just like medical inoculation, which
exposes a person's body to a weak version of a virus. The weakened virus triggers
the production of antibodies in response, but it is not strong enough to overwhelm
the body's resistance. Later, when exposed to the full virus, the body knows what to
expect and is better able to resist than it would have been before the inoculation.
● Attitude inoculation, then, exposes a person to a weak logical argument that is
contrary to their pre- existing attitude. This triggers the creation of counterarguments
in response. Later, when exposed to a strong persuasion technique that attempts to
change their pre-existing attitude through logic, the individual already has arguments
to use in defence.

WILLIAM MCGUIRE'S
EXPERIMENT

For example, imagine you are the parent of a young boy and want to do everything you can
to help him resist the peer pressure to smoke that he may encounter one day. One thing you
could do to help is to facilitate attitude inoculation. By role-playing some actual scenarios
your son may face, you could help him devise strategies to resist the pressure to smoke. As
a matter of fact, real research conducted in junior high and high schools have shown that
using attitude inoculation dramatically reduces rates of teenage smoking.

Another example of attitude inoculation comes from an experiment conducted in the early
1960s. William McGuire was the social psychologist who developed the theory of attitude
inoculation. In his classic study, he separated participants into two groups. One group
received information that argued that brushing one's teeth may do more harm than good. This
was followed by a group discussion and presentation of information that refuted the evidence
in favor of the original belief that brushing one's teeth is very beneficial. The second group
did not receive any information, nor did they have a discussion about the topic.

One week later, both groups were presented with a strong argument against frequent
brushing. As you likely suspect, members of the first group - the one that was inoculated -
had a number of
counterarguments ready and were more able to resist the persuasion. Members of the
second group, who never had the opportunity to think about the subject beforehand,
were much more susceptible to the persuasive argument.

Although it may seem odd that people would be so easily convinced that a widely accepted
fact is untrue, McGuire explained that it is easy to change people's minds about things that
they have always taken for granted. This is because most people have very little - if any -
practice defending an attack on an attitude that no one ever questions.

● People need motivation and (cognitive) capacity to defend their attitudes. Defending
our attitudes can make them more important, and we are more motivated to defend
important attitudes.
● Most people underestimate their vulnerability to persuasive appeals. People are very
easy to influence via subliminal stimuli.
● These are stimuli that we don't perceive consciously but that nevertheless have an
influence on us.
● People often seek to resist persuasion, and one of their best weapons is awareness.
● People protect established attitudes by ignoring or resisting information that threatens
them.
● Being forewarned of a persuasion attempt, and having previous experience with
related arguments, can help resistance.
● Selective Avoidance-tendency to direct attention away from information that
challenges existing attitudes, which increases resistance to persuasion.
● Exposure to arguments opposed to one's attitudes, along with arguments that refute
these counter-attitudinal positions, can strengthen people's original attitudes.
How we sometimes change our own attitude
● "The person who continues to smoke, knowing that it is bad for his health, may also
feel
(a) he enjoys smoking so much it is worth it;
(b) the chances of his health suffering are not as serious as some would make out;
(c) he can't always avoid every possible dangerous contingency and still live; and
(d) perhaps even if he stopped smoking he would put on weight which is equally bad
for his health.
So, continuing to smoke is, after all, consistent with his ideas about smoking.'

COGNITIVE DISSONANCE- SELF-JUSTIFICATION

● The term "cognitive dissonance” was coined in 1957 by Leon Festinger, an American
social psychologist.
● Festinger's cognitive dissonance theory suggests that all humans have an inner drive
to hold all our attitudes and beliefs in harmony and feel positive within our
own-selves, so we can avoid disharmony.
● More specifically, cognitive dissonance refers to a situation involving conflicting
beliefs or attitudes which produces an internal discomfort.
 ● Naturally, we try to fix this discomfort by altering our attitudes, behaviors, and
beliefs.

DISSONANCE AND ATTITUDE CHANGE: THE EFFECTS OF INDUCED OR

FORCED COMPLIANCE

INDUCED/FORCED COMPLIANCE - Situations in which individuals are somehow

induced to say or do things inconsistent with their true attitudes.
● • This is also known as forced compliance.
● • For example, this may happen many a time with a very close
● friend or a person highly admired by us. It may be difficult to dislike their proposals.
● • Example 1: Believing that lying is bad (First cognition) and being forced to lie
(second cognition)
● Example 2: Líking a friend (first cognition) while knowing that he hates your brother
(second cognition)
● In such a case the person can claim that his friend doesn't like his brother because he
didn't have time to know him well.
Cognitive dissonance theory is based on three fundamental assumptions
1. Humans are sensitive to inconsistencies between actions and beliefs.
2. Recognition of this inconsistency will cause dissonance, and will motivate an individual to
resolve the dissonance.
3. Dissonance will be resolved in one of three basic ways:

DIRECT TACTICS TO REDUCE DISSONANCE

a) Change beliefs
● Perhaps the simplest way to resolve dissonance between actions and beliefs is simply
to change your beliefs. You could, of course, just decide that cheating is o.k.
● This would take care of any dissonance. However, if the belief is fundamental and
important to you such a course of action is unlikely.
● Moreover, our basic beliefs and attitudes are pretty stable, and people don't just go
around changing basic beliefs/attitudes/opinions all the time, since we rely a lot on
our world view in predicting events and organizing our thoughts.
● Therefore, though this is the simplest option for resolving dissonance it's probably not
the most common.
Change actions
● A second option would be to make sure that you never do this action again. you may
say to yourself that you will never cheat on a test again, and this may aid in resolving
the dissonance.
● However, aversive conditioning (i.e., guilt/anxiety) can often be a pretty poor way of
learning, especially if you can train yourself not to feel these things.
● Plus, you may really benefit in some way from the action that's inconsistent with your
beliefs. So, the trick would be to get rid of this feeling without changing your beliefs
or your actions, and this leads us to the third, and probably most common, method of
resolution.
Change perception of action
A third and more complex method of resolution is to change the way you
view/remember/perceive your action.
In more colloquial terms, you would "rationalize" your actions.
● For example, you might decide that the test you cheated on was for a dumb class that
you didn't need anyway.
● Or you may say to yourself that everyone cheats so why not you?
In other words, you think about your action in a different manner or context so that it no
longer appears to be inconsistent with your beliefs.

HOW THE PERCEIVED REASONS FOR ENGAGING IN AN

ATTITUDE-DISCREPANT BEHAVIOR MAY INFLUENCE THE ATTITUDE
CHANGE.
 ● Strong reasons to engage in attitude-discrepant behaviour -> weak dissonance ->
attitude change is relatively small
● Weak reasons to engage in attitude-discrepant behaviour -> strong dissonance ->
attitude change is relatively large
Dissonance and 'less-leads-to-more effecť
● • Less reasons or rewards for performing an attitude-discrepant behavior often results
in more dissonance and thus greater attitude change, since it gives people less
justification.
● Dissonance is stronger and attitudes change more when there is no real justification
for engaging in attitude-discrepant behavior.
● In such situations, attitude change is maximum when we have reasons that are barely
sufficient to get us to engage in attitude discrepant behavior.
● Stronger reasons (or larger rewards) -less or no dissonance and show produce less
attitude change
● The fact that offering individuals small rewards for engaging in counterattitudinal
behavior (advocating a position that is at variance with his or her attitudes) often
produces more dissonance, and so more attitude change.
PREJUDICE
● • Unfavorable or negative attitude towards a group of people, based on insufficient or
incorrect information about the group to whom it is directed.
● Worchel et al. (1988): an unjustified negative attitude toward an individual based
solely on that individual's membership in a group.
● Discrimination is the action that expresses the attitude of
● prejudice.
● Prejudice is a form of antisocial behavior, and it causes concern for all communities.
● It causes stress and tension between groups, and harm to the victims.
● A negative attitude towards a group is not always necessarily
● prejudice.
● For example, it is common for members of a society to have negative attitude towards
a group of people who have been found guilty on a court of law for committing
criminal activity, such as murder.
PREJUDICE, STEREOTYPING AND DISCRIMINATION
● Prejudice: The Affective Component
● Stereotypes: The Cognitive Component
● Discrimination: The Behavioral Component

Prejudice: The Affective Component

● The affective component is the emotion (e.g., anger, warmth) associated with the
attitude object.
● Although prejudice refers to either positive or negative affect, people usually reserve
the word 'prejudice' for use only when it refers to negative attitudes about others.

Stereotyping: The Cognitive Component

● The cognitive component is our beliefs and thoughts (cognitions) about the target of
prejudice. It involves stereotyping.
● A stereotype is a generalization about a group of people in which identical
characteristics are assigned to virtually all members of one group, regardless of actual
variation among the members.

Discrimination: The Behavioral Component

● The behavioral component of prejudice refers to the actions, or
● behavior, associated with the prejudiced object, such as discrimination.
● Discrimination is an unjustified, negative, or harmful action towards a member of a
group, simply because of his or her membership in that group.
● Stereotypic beliefs (prejudice) can result in unfair treatment.

Some of the most well-known types of prejudice include:

● Racism
● Sexism
 ● Classicism
● Homophobia
● Nationalism
● Religious prejudice
● Ageism

ORIGIN OF PREJUDICE
● Direct intergroup conflict- Realistic conflict Theory
● Social Categorization
● Role of Social learning
● Cognitive Sources of Prejudice: Role of Stereotypes

Realistic Conflict Theory

● Realistic Conflict Theory is the theory that limited resources lead to conflict between
groups and result in increased prejudice and discrimination.
● According to this view, prejudice stems from competition between social groups over
valued commodities or opportunities.
● The theory further suggests that such competition persists, the
● members of each group involved come to view the other group in increasingly
negative ways.
● They label the members of the other groups as enemies, view their own group as
superiors, and draw the boundaries between themselves and their opponents even
more firmly.
Social Categorization
● Social Identity Theory
● Social identity is a person's sense of who they are based on their group
membership(s).
● Tajfel (1979) proposed that the groups (e.g. social class, family, football team etc.)
which people belonged to were an important source of pride and self-esteem.
● Groups give us a sense of social identity: a sense of belonging to the social world.
● We tend to divide the social world into 2 distinct categories--- US and THEM
● The tendency to divide the social world into 2 distinct categories US and THEM
● We view other persons as belonging either to our own social group, usually termed as
IN GROUP, or to another group - OUT GROUP
● We make such distinctions on the basis of many dimensions, including race, religion,
gender, ethnic background, occupation, and even the town or neighborhood where
people live.
● This process is called SOCIAL CATEGORIZATION
● As diverse individuals, humans can experience conflict when interacting with people
who are different from each other.
● Prejudice, or negative feelings and evaluations, is common when people are from a
different social group (i.e., out-group).
 ● Negative attitudes toward out-groups can lead to discrimination.
● Prejudice and discrimination against others can be based on gender, race, ethnicity,
social class, sexual orientation, or a variety of other social identities.
● Another way prejudice is encouraged is through the in-group bias (the us-vs.-them).
● An in-group is a group with which a person identifies and feels he/she is a member
of; an out-group is a group with which a person does not identify.
● In-group bias is the especially positive feelings and special treatment we reserve for
people we have defined as part of our in group.
● Out-group members are seen as possessing negative traits and are often disliked.
● This tendency to favor the in-group while denigrating the out group is so pervasive
that people show this bias even under the most minimal conditions.
● Why do we show this tendency to favor the in-group while denigrating the out-group?
Because,
i) Belonging to a group gives us social identity, and
ii) Having a social identity contributes to feelings of positive self esteem.
As predicted from in-group bias theory, research shows that:
i) the greater the identification with one's own group, the greater the discrimination
against an out-group.
ii) when people's self-esteem is threatened, they are especially likely to denigrate the
out-group.
Is there a way to minimize the us-vs-them effect?
● Try to foster feelings of a common identity between groups (see research by Clement
and colleagues learning the other groups language).
● To boost our self-esteem in some other domain, so as to negate the need to derogate
others for this purpose.
Role of Social learning
● • A third perspective on the origins of prejudice begins with the obvious facts that
such attitudes are learned.
● We acquire them from people around us through the process of social learning.
● Prejudice emerges from countless experiences in which children hear or observe their
parents, friends, teachers and others expressing prejudiced views.
● Because children want to be like these persons, and are often rewarded for expressing
the 'right' views (those held by adults), they quickly adopt such attitudes themselves.
● Parents are an enormous source of information and influence
● Peers (classmates, friends) also shape our attitudes Authoritarian personality - favors
obedience, eschews Cower status people
- Is contributed to by our upbringing
Cognitive Sources of Prejudice: Role of Stereotypes
● Stereotypes: The Cognitive Component
● When we hold a stereotype about a person, we have expectations that he or she will
fulfill that stereotype. A self-fulfilling prophecy is an expectation held by a person
that alters his or her behavior in a way that tends to make it true.
● When we hold stereotypes about a person, we tend to treat the person according to our
expectations. This treatment can influence the person to act according to our
stereotypic expectations, thus confirming our stereotypic beliefs.
 ● Research by Rosenthal and Jacobson (1968) found that disadvantaged students whose
teachers expected them to perform well had higher grades than disadvantaged
students whose teachers expected them to do poorly.

Given that stereotypes often lead us into serious errors and maladjustments in our social
thought, why do they persist?
● • They are a kind of labor-saving device where social cognition is concerned.
● They allow us to make quick and dirty judgments about others
● without engaging in complex, effortful thought.
● Another possibility is that stereotypes allow individuals to protect their social identity.
● By perceiving all members of out-groups as alike, and as processing more negative
traits than members of our own-in group, we can boost our own group and our
identification with it.
Functions
● Prejudice is a destructive phenomenon, and it is pervasive because it serves many
functions:
Prejudices ​bond
● The most important function of prejudice (and of extremist attitudes and ideologies) is
probably bonding, where differentiation from the other creates social identity and a
sense of belonging within the in-group.
● This is why political propaganda so often plays the prejudice and racism cards,
because devaluing minorities heightens the importance of the in-group
● Prejudices serve to preserve and enhance self-esteem.
This function is directly connected with the first. The more inferior the other in comparison to
the in-group the more positive the self-esteem gained through group identification.
● Prejudices offer control and legitimize hierarchies.
Prejudices serve as justifications for an existing social order. By explaining why certain
groups possess​ ​greater wealth and power (e.g. whites, men) than others (e.g. blacks, women)
they defend a hierarchical status quo or even help to establish it in the first place
● Prejudices also have consequences for their targets.
● Experiencing prejudice has negative effects on the target's physical and emotional
well-being as well as on their achievements and success in life.
● Research has found that experiencing prejudice and discrimination destroys
self-respect and can lead to self stigmatization.
● Scapegoating - is sometimes referred to as the frustration-aggression theory. It
involves:
● socially frustrating conditions, such as economic depression and unemployment.
● The need for frustration to be released, which results in blame being directed towards
a scapegoat- usually a minority out-group leading people to discriminate against and
perpetrate verbal and physical abuse towards that group.
 ● According to this theory, people may be prejudiced toward a group in order to vent
their anger. In essence, they use the group they dislike as their target for all of their
anger...as a vent.

PREVENTING AND REDUCING PREJUDICE

● Prejudice can be difficult to change, however, education, intergroup contact, cognitive
interventions setting superordinate goals and direct experience have been successful
to an extent.
● Education
● (i) The formation of prejudice can be impeded through education programs in schools
where children are taught about tolerance, the consequences of prejudice and what
constitutes discrimination.
● ii) Getting people to focus on positive aspects of themselves (self affirmation) reduces
the need to denigrate others in order to get a self-esteem boost.
● iii) Blurring the distinction between 'us' and 'them' can improve attitudes toward
out-groups.
● iv) learning not to hate;
● v) revising stereotypical beliefs;
● vi) The contact hypothesis;
● vii) Cooperation and independence: the jigsaw classroom;
● One of the most heavily studied techniques for prejudice reduction
● is intergroup contact.
● Gordon Allport proposed the contact hypothesis which states that regular interaction
between members of different groups reduces prejudice.
● The contact hypothesis is based on the notion that prejudice arises out of ignorance,
which is the result of limited contact with out group members.
● Limited contact with and lack of knowledge about members of different groups
encourages the development of unfavorable, stereotypical views (Ellison & Powers,
1994).
● According to the contact hypothesis, frequent contact with other group members
promotes positive and tolerant attitudes towards the group as a whole as it allows
in-group members to gain information about the lifestyles, behaviors and experiences
of other groups.
● It is believed that the information acquired through contact is generalized to the whole
group and negative stereotypical views are consequently disproved.
Jigsaw Classroom Technique
● Psychologist Elliot Aronson and his colleagues decided to do something about the
way diverse classrooms approached work.
● They wanted to find a way to teach students while addressing some of the issues
around diversity, including the competitiveness and tendency for students of different
backgrounds to avoid each other.
 ● Their belief was that if they could design classroom activities in a certain way, they
could indeed reduce prejudice.
● • The jigsaw technique is a method of organizing classroom activity that makes
students dependent on each other to succeed.
● It breaks classes into groups and breaks assignments into pieces that the group
assembles to complete the (jigsaw) puzzle.
● The technique splits classes into mixed groups to work on small problems that the
group collates into a final outcome.
● For example, an in-class assignment is divided into topics. Students are then split into
groups with one member assigned to each topic. Working individually, each student
learns about his or her topic and presents it to their group.
● Next, students gather into groups divided by topic. Each member presents again to the
topic group.In same-topic groups, students reconcile points of view and synthesize
information.
● They create a final report. Finally, the original groups reconvene and listen to
presentations from each member. The final presentations provide all group members
with an understanding of their own material, as well as the findings that have emerged
from topic-specific group discussion.
● It can be concluded that the technique boosts cooperation and reduces prejudice.
● As well as helping integration, Aronson's finding that the technique was helpful for
learning has led to it becoming widely used in schools.
The Robber's Cave Experiment by Sherif
● In this experiment twenty-two 11 year-old boys were taken to a summer camp in
Robbers Cave State Park, Oklahoma, little knowing they were the subjects of an
experiment. Before the trip the boys were randomly divided into two groups. It's these
two groups that formed the basis of Sherif's study of how prejudice and conflict build
up between two groups of people
● Scanned with CamScanner
● When the boys arrived, they were housed in separate cabins and, for the first week,
did not know about the existence of the other group. They spent this time bonding
with each other while swimming and hiking. Both groups chose a name which they
had stencilled on their shirts and flags: one group was the Eagles and the other the
Rattlers.
● The two groups now established, the experiment moved into its second phase. For the
first time the two groups were allowed to find out about each other and soon the signs
of intergroup conflict emerged in the form of verbal abuse.
● A little name-calling wasn't enough, though. The experimenters wanted to increase
the conflict substantially. To do this they pitted the groups against each other in a
series of competitions. This ratcheted up the antagonism between the two groups,
especially once all the team scores were added up and the Rattlers won the overall
trophy for the competitive activities. They didn't let the Eagles forget it.
● The Rattlers staked their claim to the ball field by planting their flag in it. Later on
each group started name calling at the other and singing derogatory songs. Soon the
groups were refusing to eat in the same room together,
● With conflict between the groups successfully instigated, the experiment now moved
into its final phase. Could the experimenters make the two groups kiss and make up?
First of all they tried some activities in which the two groups were brought together,
such as watching a film and shooting firecrackers, but neither of these worked.
● The experimenters then tried a new approach. They took the two groups to a new
location and gave them a series of problems to try and solve. In the first problem the
boys were told the drinking water supply had been attacked by vandals. After the two
groups successfully worked together to unblock a faucet, the first seeds of peace were
sown.

● In the second problem the two groups had to club together to pay for the movie they
wanted to watch. Both groups also agreed on the movie they should watch. By the
evening the members of both groups were once again eating together.
● The groups 'accidentally came across more problems over the next few days. The key
thing about each of them was that they involved superordinate goals: boys from both
groups worked together to achieve something they all had an interest in. Finally all
the boys decided to travel home together in the same bus. Peace had broken out all
over.
● These studies had three phases:
● (1) Group formation, in which the members of groups got to know each other's, social
norms developed, leadership and structure emerged,
● (2) Group conflict, in which the now-formed groups came into contact with each
other, competing in games and challenges, and competing for control of territory, and
● (3) Conflict resolution, where Sherif and colleagues tried various means of reducing
the animosity and low-level violence between the groups.
● It is in the Robbers Cave experiments that Sherif showed that superordinate goals
(goals so large that it requires more than one group to achieve the goal) reduced
conflict significantly more effectively than other strategies (e.g., communication,
contact).