Attitudes

1
Attitudes

• Lecture 7

2
Attitude

• Attitude from Latin. Aptus (fit)
• Attitude
• Learned (conditioning, exposure, vicarious
  learning etc.)
• Stable (stable disposition)
• Evaluation of a target object (emotional
  component)
• That influences behavior

3
Attitudes and other concepts

• Habits - behavioral
• Values general goals
• Beliefs probabilistic judgments
• Opinions elements of knowledge system

4
Functions of attitudes

• Cognitive source of knowledge
• Utilitarian maximize gains and minimize losses
• Egotistic and defensive protect values and
  identities
• Value expression

5
Structure of attitudes

• Three components of attitudes (ABC Affective,
  Behavioral, Cognitive)
• EMOTIONAL evaluation of the target object
• COGNITIVE knowledge about the target object
• BEHAVIORAL behavior towards the target object 
• The most important (definitional) attitudinal
  componet emotional

6
Attitudes form a structure

• Fritz Heider (1958) Concept of cognitive unit
• Objects objects of attitudes
• Relations between objects
• Emotional relations
• liking
• disliking
• Unit relations
• positive (eg. owning, approaching)
• negative (eg. avoidance, ignoring, selling etc.)

7
Cognitive unit
Self
R2
R1
Object A
Object B
R3
8
Cognitive unit
Self
Balanced unit


Object A
Object B

9
Cognitive unit
Unbalanced unit
Self


Object A
Object B
-
10
Cognitive balance

• Cognitive units may be balanced
• My two friends like each other
• Or unbalanced
• I am jealous of a friend of my boy-friend
• Affective consistency condition for cognitive
  balance

11
Cognitive balance theory Abelson Rosenberg
(1960)





-

-
-
-
-
-
Balanced units
Unbalanced units
12
Restoring balance





-

-
-
-
-
-
Balanced units
Unbalanced units
13
Balanced structure
-


-
-

-


-

14
Unbalanced structure

-


-

-
-
-


15
Theories of attitude change

• Two directions of the relationship between
  attitude and behavior
• Attitude ? Behavior
• I like him therefore I will help him
• He irritates me therefore I will attack him
• Behavior ? Attitude
• I helped him, therefore I like him
• I hurt him, therefore I dont like him

16
Conditions of attitude change

• Attitude ? behavior
• In order to change behavior one has to change
  attitude
• Behavior ? attitude
• In order to change attitude one has to change
  behavior (attitude justification of behavior)

17
Attitude ? behavior

• Theories of persuasion (Yale school)
• Theory of reasoned action (M. Fishbein I.
  Ajzen)
• Elaboration likelihood model (R. Petty J.
  Caccioppo)
• Assimilation-contrast theory (M. Sherif)

18
Behavior ? attitude

• Theory of cognitive dissonance
• Self-attribution theory

19
Leon Festinger (1957)
Theory of cognitive dissonance
Dissonance any inconsistency between two
beliefs, such that from one of them follows its
contradiction
20
Inconsistency in Festingers theory
Behavior (-)
Self-evaluation ()
I have lied but I
am honest
I made a stupid decision but
I am rational
I inserted lots of effort
but
I am reasonable
21
Insufficient reward paradigm
Boring task
Attitude measurement I
Promised reward
Lie
Reward 1
Reward 20
Attitude measurement II
22
Conclusions

• Low reward ? strong dissonance ? attitude change
  (behavior justification)
• High reward ? no dissonance ? no attitude change

23
Unjustified effort paradigm
Initiation to a group
No initiation
Boring task
Attitude measurement
24
Conclusions

• Difficult access to a group ? more dissonance ?
  the group more attractive
• We value more what is difficult to achieve

25
Post-decisional dissonance paradigm
A
B
C
D
E
Choice D
Post-decisional dissonance
Increase attractiveness of D Decrease
attractiveness of other alternatives
26
Strength of post-decisional dissonance

• Number of alternatives ? the more the stronger
  dissonance
• Similarity of alternatives ? the lower, the
  stronger dissonance

27
Who is more persuasive liked or disliked
superior?
Liked superior
Disliked superior
Attitude towards eating grasshoppers
Eating grasshoppers
Measurement of attitude towards food from
grasshoppers
28
Cognitive dissonance theory

• Motivational dynamics
• Continuation
• Descriptive models of decision making
• Theory of intrinsic motivation and engagement
• Entrapment theory

29
Entrapment mechanisms and consequences
30
Rational or rationalizing?

• What does it mean to be rational?
• Logical and consistent if you said A you should
  say B)
• Justified you should act in a justified way, you
  should have good reasons for doing something
• Efficient you should choose the best means to an
  end
• Critical you should objectively analyze an issue
  from many points of view

31
Rational decisions

• Have clear goals know what you want
• Dont decide hastily consider many possibilities
  and many aspects of each alternative
• Dont be involved in wishful thinking what you
  would like to happen doesnt always happen
• Be efficient choose optimal means to your ends
• Be efficient avoid losses, maximize gains
• Learn from your mistakes

32
Do people always act rationally?

• Sunk costs effect
• Entrapment or to much invested to quit
• Commitment
• Escalation behavior
• Perseverance on unrealistic goals
• Status quo bias

33
Decision traps
34
Sunk costs effect

• B. Staw (1976)
• Big enterprise produces technical goods
• Two main sections
• Consumer products
• Industrial products
• Subject vice-director for finances

35
Sunk costs effect

• 10 millions to be assigned to one of two
  sections
• Two conditions
• Subject decides which section should be given
  money
• Subject has no influence on assignement
• Feedback information on consequences of money
  assignment
• Positive the section flourishes
• Negative the section loses

36
Experimental conditions
department
profit
loss
subject
responsible
not responsible
37
New prospects

• Additional 20 millions
• Distributing the money between the two sections
• Subject decides how much each section gets

38
Results
39
Results

• More money assigned to the loser
• More money assigned if the subject felt
  responsible

40
Teger (1980) One-dollar auction game

• Rules of the game
• Buying one dollar
• Any number of players can bid (minimum two)
• Bids should be relatively small and escalate
  slowly (e.g., 5c)
• This player who bids the highest amount gets the
  dollar
• The player who bids the next highest amount must
  also pay

41
Two turning points

• Profit for the experimenter 50c 55c
• Loss for the players 1,05

42
Results

• Bids up to 10 in order to buy one dollar

43
Decision traps or entrapment

• Entrapment a decision making process whereby
  individuals escalate their commitment to a
  previously chosen, though failing, course of
  action in order to justify or make good on
  prior investments

44
Too much invested too quit

• Waiting for a bus
• Continuing a failing marriage/relationship
• Staying on unsatisfactory job
• Escalation of war which has no chance for quick
  resolution
• Hazard and gambling continuing to invest beyond
  rational limits
• Face-losing politicians

45
Situational determinants of entrapment

• The decision makers investments in the pursuit
  of the goal can be interpreted as irretrievable
  expenses (sunk costs)
• The decision maker must be able to choose between
  entering/remaining in the entrapping situation or
  not
• It is never entirely certain that the decision
  makers goal will be realized
• In order to achieve their objective, the decision
  makers must make investments repeatedly
  (continual rather than one-shot decisions)

46
When do we fall into a trap?

• Freedom of choice
• The sunk costs cannot be retrieved
• The goal is uncertain
• Continuous investment

47
How does the entrapment work?

• Growing conflict whether to make continued
  investments (the pressures to both withdraw from
  and remain in the situation grow over time)
•  An important shift in the decision makers
  definition of involvement
• First clear economic or rational reasons to
  enter the situation
• Later shift to emotional reasons (attachment,
  saving face etc.)
• From rational to rationalizing

48
Experimental demonstrations of entrapment

• Milgrams experiment on obedience
• Zimbardos experimental prison

49
Behavior of teachers
subjects
the victim pounded on the wall again, then gets
silent
100
80
The victim pounded on the wall in protest at this
point
60
50
Fully 65 of the subjects obeyed the
experimenters command to deliver a 450 Volt
shock to the learner
40
20
10
Labels on the shock generator
Intense
Very intense
Dangerous
450V
Moderate
Very strong
Light
Strong
50
How does the trap work Learning from Las
Vegas...
51
Impressive exteriors
52
Equally impressive interiors
53
Improbable scenery
54
Elegantly served (and cheap!) food
55
Luxurious rest
56
Never ending amusement
57
And last but not least... The play machines
everywhere
58
Good bye Las Vegas... We will come back here
again....
59
How to get out of the trap?

• To set an upper limit of investments (money,
  time, number of victims?)
• To stop for a moment to decide if I want to
  invest further
• To state that I have lost less than I have
  thought and in fact I have even gained
• To admit that the future is unknown and that I
  can lose even more
• Stop worrying about what the others will say
• To look into the mirror

60
Interrupting escalating behavior (1)

• Setting limits (how much can I spend time,
  money?)
• Stopping after having reached the limit do I
  want to continue?
• Taking a new decision

61
Interrupting escalating behavior (2)

• To state that I have l lost less than I have
  thought, in fact I have even gained
• Entrapment risk-seeking behavior
• Kahneman Tversky (1979) Prospect theory
• People are risk averse for gains and risk-seeking
  for losses

62
Task 1 what would you prefer?
To get

• 1 000 NOK for sure
• 2 000 NOK if even numbers (2, 4, 6)
• nothing if odd numbers (1, 3, 5)

63
Task 1 what would you prefer?
To give away

• 1 000 NOK for sure
• 2 000 NOK if even numbers (2, 4, 6)
• nothing if odd numbers (1, 3, 5)

64
Utility curve
65
Computing Expected Value (EV) of a lottery

• Gains (utility of alternative A vs. B)
• (A) 1 000 NOK x 1,00 1 000 NOK
• (B) less then 2 000 NOK x 0,50 less then 1
  000 NOK
• Losses (utility of alternative A vs. B)
• (A) -1 000 NOK x 1,00 -1 000 NOK
• (B) less then - 2 000 NOK x 0,50 less then -1
  000 NOK

66
To leave or to continue?

• Imagine how much you have gained so far ? risk
  averse attitude ? leaving the entraping situation
• Imagine how much you have lost so far ? risk
  seeking attitude ? continuing the entrapment

67
Interrupting escalating behavior (3)

• To admit that the future is unknown and that I
  can loose even more
• Role of closeness impact of goals is inversely
  related to their distance each further step
  close leads to an increase in the attractive
  motive force (Fox and Hoffman, 2002, p. 278)
• Clarity of completion increasing clarity of the
  road to the goals that one has set enhances the
  motivational strength to persevere in attaining
  them... (Fox and Hoffman, 2002, p. 279)

68
Interrupting escalating behavior (5)

• Switch from subjective to objective
  self-awareness (focus on targets beyond the
  individual vs. self-focus)

69
Interrupting escalating behavior (4)

• Stop worrying what the others will say

70
Robert Wicklund theory of objective vs.
subjective self-awareness
Objective self-awareness (self-focus)
object
Myself (subject)
Subjective self-awareness
71
Stimuli triggering objective self-awareness
Monitors (own image)
audience
mirrors
Own voice tape-recorded
72
Psychological consequences of self-focused
attention

• Unpleasant tension
• Discrepancy between the standard (e.g., norms,
  values) and behavior
• Feeling of guilt
• Interruption in executing programs (editing
  behavior)
• Increasing value-behavior congruency

73
Increasing value-behavior consistency
More and more often I think about face lifting
74
Ways used to divert attention

• Gesticulation
• Playing with small objects
• Cigarettes/alcohol
• starters in speech (well, uhhmm, yyy...)

75
How entrapment works Zimbardos prison
experiment

• http//www.prisonexp.org

76
When is escalation a good thing?

• Positive forms of involvement
• Intrinsically motivating behaviors
• Passions