PSY 320:

Attitudes
Lecture 1 Questions
Dr. William Ryan
The Multi-Component Model of
Attitudes

Attitude Object

Affective Cognitive Behavioural

information information information

Attitude
(summary evaluation)

Affective Cognitive Behavioural

responses responses responses
Three Independent Components?
(Breckler, 1984)
• Study 1 Measures:
– Affect:
• Heart rate, positive mood, negative mood, affect
scale
– Behaviour:
• Behaviour scale, willing distance to pictured
snakes, action sequence with live snake
– Cognition:
• Cognition scale, semantic differential scale,
thought listing
Heart Rate Cognition Scale

Thought Listing Task

Negative Mood

Positive Mood Willing Distance

Semantic Differential Scale

Affect Scale

Behaviour Scale

Action Sequence
Positive Mood

Affect Scale

Negative Mood

Heart Rate

Cognition Scale
Attitude
Thought Listing Task

Semantic Differential Scale

Willing Distance

Behaviour Scale

Action Sequence
Positive Mood

Affect Scale Affect

Negative Mood

Heart Rate

Cognition Scale
Cognition
Thought Listing Task

Semantic Differential Scale

Willing Distance

Behaviour Scale Behaviour

Action Sequence
 Three Independent Components?
(Breckler, 1984)
• Results of factor analysis:
– All measured variables
loaded highly on their
respective factors, with the
exception of heart rate
(which turned out to be a
poor indicator of any
attitude component)
– Three-factor model (3
independent components)
does a much better job of
fitting the data than a one-
factor (single component)
model
Positive Mood

Affect Scale Affect

Negative Mood
.38
Heart Rate

Cognition Scale
Cognition .50
Thought Listing Task

Semantic Differential Scale

.70

Willing Distance

Behaviour Scale Behaviour

Action Sequence
Three Independent Components?
(Breckler, 1984)
• Study 2 Measures: Snakes

– Verbal measures only

– No live snake

• Results:
– Three-factor model only
slightly better than one-
factor model
– Attitude components were
more highly correlated
– Why?
Positive Mood

Affect Scale Affect

Negative Mood
.82
Heart Rate

Cognition Scale
Cognition .86
Thought Listing Task

Semantic Differential Scale

.81

Willing Distance

Behaviour Scale Behaviour

Action Sequence
Positive Mood

Affect Scale

Negative Mood

Heart Rate

Cognition Scale
Attitude
Thought Listing Task

Semantic Differential Scale

Willing Distance

Behaviour Scale

Action Sequence
Three Independent Components?
(Breckler, 1984)

• The three components may appear to be more

consistent with one another than they actually
are, when:
1. Only verbal/self-report measures of the three
components are used
• Nonverbal measures (physiological responses, overt
behaviour) should also be used
2. Responses are measured in the absence of the
attitude object
• Measures should be taken when the attitude object is
physically present
 Review: Attitude Components
• What type of information do you think contributes to your attitude
toward the following objects?
• Do the different components have the same or opposing evaluative
implications?

1. French Fries
2. Justin Bieber
3. Robarts Library
4. Vegetarianism
 PSY 320:
Attitudes
Lecture 2:
Attitudes: Structure,
Function, & Formation Part
Dr. William Ryan
Lecture 2: Overview

Attitude Formation

The Functional Approach

Attitude Strength
Attitude Formation
 Attitude Formation
• Learning Theory: Attitudes are learned based on
past experiences
– Classical & Operant Conditioning
– Observational Learning
• Cognitive Dissonance & Self-perception theory:
emphasize the role of behaviors in determining
attitudes
• Functionalist theory: Attitudes are formed based
on a personal benefit they offer
 The Mere Exposure Effect
• Repeated exposure to a (neutral)stimulus object results
in a preference for that stimulus
• Demonstrated across cultures and species
• Occurs even when presented outside awareness
• A form of classical conditioning where absence of negative
events constitutes the unconditioned stimulus.
• This preference/liking can be transferred to other
stimuli
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S3V
B3G4UaAk
The Functional
Approach
 Example

https://toronto.citynews.ca/2019/09/06/chick-
fil-a-toronto-protest/
 The Functional Approach

• In short – we have attitudes because they

are functional
– They serve various needs, help us achieve
various goals
 Functional Approach
• Four functions initially proposed by Daniel Katz
(1960):
1. Understanding/Knowledge/Object appraisal
2. Instrumental/Need Satisfaction
3. Value Expression
• 3b. Social Adjustive Function
4. Ego Defense
 1. Understanding/Knowledge
• Attitudes help us understand and make sense of
the world

• Attitudes help categorize and classify objects in

environment.
– Hence why it’s sometimes called object appraisal
function

• The knowledge function of attitudes “gives

meaning to what would otherwise be an
unorganized chaotic universe.”
2. Instrumental/Need Satisfaction
• Attitudes that help us obtain desired
outcomes & reach our goals
• Attitudes may be formed and reinforced
by past experiences of rewards and
punishments for specific behaviours
• Utilitarian or instrumental attitudes serve
to maximize rewards and minimize
punishments
 3. Value Expressive
• Attitudes serve to express a person’s core
values
• Sometimes termed the social identity
function if communicating something
about yourself to a social group.
– 3b. If value is expressed with the the goal of
“fitting in” or of conveying status then termed
the social-adjustive function.
 3. Value Expressive

Marriage Marriage
Equality Equality

Attitude: Anti-
Attitude: Pro- Marriage Equality
Attitude: Pro-
Marriage Equality
Recycling
Value: “I value the
Value: “I value equal sanctity of marriage
Value: “I value the
rights for everyone.” between a man and a
environment.”
woman.”
3b. Individual Differences in Social
Adjustive Function
• Social Adjustment: the motivation for identifying yourself
with your reference group.
• Self-monitoring predicts the likelihood that people will
base their attitudes on the social adjustive function.
– High Self-Monitors: adept at changing behavior
across situations, sensitive to the social environment
– Low Self-Monitors: focused on own evaluations,
behavior more consistent across situations
• High self-monitors more likely to have attitudes
based on social adjustive function
 Name that function!
Attitude:
Pro-Vegetarianism
Person B’s Reason:
Person A’s Reason:
It shows more
It is better for
compassion for
heart health.
animals.
 Attitude Object: Canada
Goose Coats

Describe an example of an
attitude toward Canada
Goose Coats that fulfills a
utilitarian function.

Describe an example of an
attitude toward Canada
Goose Coats that fulfills a
value-expressive function.

Describe an example of an
attitude toward Canada
Goose Coats that fulfills a
social identity or social
adjustive function.
 4. Ego Defensive Function
• Motivation to protect our sense of self & self-
esteem
• Ego-defensive attitudes designed to
bolster/protect self-esteem
• Examples:
– Prejudice and stereotypes

– Terror Management Theory

 4. Ego Defensive Function
• Fein & Spencer (1997) – Self-Esteem &
Prejudice
– Participants given either positive or negative
feedback on IQ test

– Later evaluate a job candidate (Jewish or Italian)

• [Esp. negative stereotypes of Jewish people in this area]

– Indicate state self-esteem

 4. Ego Defensive Function
Increase in Self-
Ratings of Candidate
Esteem
Jewish
Candidate
Italian
Candidate

Positive Negative Positive Negative

Test Feedback Test Feedback
 Attitude Functions
Herek, 1987
 Multiple Functions
• Sometimes, functions depends on attitude
object
 Multiple
Multiple Functions
Functions
• Sometimes, function depends on person
Attitude Function & Persuasion
• Persuasive messages more effective when
targeting key function

• Example: Advertisements for Perfume

– Key function: ??
Attitude Function & Persuasion
• Persuasive messages more effective when
targeting key function

• Example: Advertisements for Perfume

– Key function: value-expressive (and/or social
adjustive)
– Value-expressive messages more effective
than utilitarian ones (Shavitt, 1990)
 Attitude Functions & Consumer
Behaviour
• Some attitude objects will tend to fulfill the same
attitudinal function for everyone
– E.g., Air conditioners, perfumes
• Matched ads à more persuasive (Shavitt, 1990)

• Attitudes toward some attitude objects may serve

different functions for different individuals
• E.g.,

• The same attitude object may also serve different

functions for the same person at different times
• Different beliefs may underly the same function
 The delicious, The price of
hearty flavour Sterling
and aroma of Blend coffee
Sterling Blend can’t be beat!
coffee come Perfect for
from a blend of students
the freshest caffeinating
coffee beans. on a budget.
 At Sterling The coffee you
Blend we source drink says
all of beans something
from organic, about the type
fair-trade farms of person you
so you can rest are. It can
easy knowing reveal your rare
each sip is doing discriminating
good in the
taste.
world.
 Why Functions Matter: Another
Example
Example: Self-Monitoring
(Snyder & DeBono, 1985; 1987)

– High self-monitoring = which

function?
– Ads focused on image persuade
high self-monitors (value
expressive)
– Ads focused on quality persuade
low self-monitors (utilitarian)
 Why Functions Matter
• Attitudes based on which functions are
easiest to change?

• Which are hardest?

Limitations & Future Directions
• Functions difficult to measure
– Do people really know the functions for their
own attitudes?
• Ambiguity in distinctions between
functions
– E.g. you study all night because you value
academic achievement (value expressive), but
you value this because you want a good job
(utilitarian),
Attitude Strength
 Attitude Strength
• Attitude strength has been assessed as:
– Confidence/Certainty
– Importance
– Centrality & Accessibility
– Intensity
 Attitude Strength
• Strong attitudes are:
– Persistent/stable over time
– Resistant to change
– More likely to influence information
processing
– More likely to guide behaviour
A Social Judgment Approach

• Theory proposed by Muzafer Sherif

– Affective and cognitive aspects of attitudes
intertwined.
– A single score can’t adequately assess attitudes
• Latitude: The range of positions a person holds
on a given issue (Acceptance, rejection, non-
commitment)
• Ego-Involvement: One’s personal commitment
to their stand on an issue
Assessing Latitude
Assessing Latitude
Assessing Latitude
 Summary
• Attitude Content & Structure: CAB model, dimensions
• Attitude formation: Three approaches to attitude
formation: Functional, Learning, and behvioural
approaches
• Attitude Functions: Attitudes serve 4 important
functions, and these motivate the development (and
change)of attitudes
• Attitude Strength: Relates to structure, formation, and
function
Thank you!