Lecture � Social IIIb - Social attitudes and their relation to social behaviour

Greg Detre

Friday, 19 May, 2000

Prof. Emler

 

4.30 seminar on Tuesday � social identity theory & application

 

 

The concept of attitude of social psychology

internal standards vs external validation

differences in attitudes/beliefs

social psychologists used to be convinced that this is the case � much of the differences in human behaviour can be seen as coming down to differences in attitude

 

Measurement of attitudes; scaling and other approaches

equal appearing interval technique (Thurstone, 1928)

stimulus, then person scaling � maximising linearity

he asked: what are actions? scale from very favourable very unfavourable

statements of attitudes � scaleable on this linear dimension

believed that we can discriminate an 11 point scale

asked people to sort statements from newspapers etc. into 11 piles � looking for agreement between his judges about the strength of each of his statements

problems:

expensive and time-consuming attitude measure

people use their own opinion as an anchor, e.g. if you�re already fundamentally opposed to capital punishment

difficult to find items in the middle of the school

summated ratings (Likert, 1932)

person scaling � maximising reliability, minimising error in measurement

looked for consistent pattern of responses

Likert scales � very reliable

scalogram analysis (Guttman, 1950)

simultaneous stimulus person scaling

maximising reproducibility (e.g. possible to get same score on questionnaires, but different answers)

difficult to use in practice

if you agree with one in the middle, then you agree with all of the ones to either side

social distance scale � measure people�s racial attitudes � if negative, will want to maintain larger distance between social groups

 

semantic differential (Osgood et al., 1957)

universal scales � maximising comparability

 

bogus pipeline (Jones & Segall, 1971)

reducing social desirability effects

lie-detector � so people feel they have to be honest

 

indirect measures (lost letter technique)

clever, but only works for certain kinds of issues

letter on the street, addressed to donations of a particular department

if people take the money, then anti-, if keep then in favour

good for surveying attitudes in an area

will be swayed by people�s attitudes to money/honesty

physiological measures

 

 

Attitude-behaviour relations; problems

racial conflict is always re-emerging somewhere

Lapiere � wrote to restaurants/hotels asking if they�d accept a Chinese etc. party

almost all said no � but 6 months before, Lapiere had been to these places, and had hardly actually been refused service

 

Wicker (1969) - Criteria for inclusion of studies in review of attitude-behaviour relations

Unit of observation

must be individual, not group

Measures available

at least one attitude measure and one behavioural measure per subject

Temporal separation of measures

attitudes and behaviour must be measured on different occasions

Direct behavioural measures

overt behavioural measures must not be merely subjects� retrospective reports of own past behaviour

 

found: the average correlation between attitude-behaviour = 0.15

i.e. attitudes aren�t explained

 

Attitude-behaviour relations; solutions

Solutions to inconsistency problem

Three component models for measurement (Rosenberg & Hovland, 1960)

 

Rosenberg & others (1960) � attitude organisation and change

attitudes � 3 components

1.       affect

2.       cognition

3.       behaviour

 

Multi-trait, multi-method

need to really demonstrate that there is something there, not a product of the measurement procedures � if there are different ways of measuring the same traits �

3 measures for affect, 3 for cognition, 3 for behaviour

Generality vs specificity

& �threshold� notion, selecting appropriate behavioural measures

e.g. Fishbein & Ajzen, 1974; Campbell, 1963)

 

 

Comparability of measures

The theory of reasoned action

Expectancy-value decision-making models

e.g. Theory of reasoned action

(Fishbein, 1967; Ajzen & Fishbein, 1980)

if you want to predict behaviour, need to ask them � what do you intend to do

attentions determine intentions

we have reasons for what we intend to do � those reasons are measurable, have 2 components:

1.       belief/expectancy value � believe that +ve/-ve outcomes/consequences are more/less likely (subjective proabilities + values) if you act on your intention

2.       beliefs/views about what other people expect you to do � varying degrees of motivation to comply with these �/span> overall subjective norm � what I should do

there are many examples of 2 component models, comprising:

internal values + other people�s expectations

 

The theory of planned behaviour

Bentler + Speckart (1979)

past behaviour + habit = very important for some things (e.g. student attendance)

lost touch with original conception of attitudes

attitudes �/span> general decision-making

not our general beliefs

 

Attitude accessibility

Fazoi & Zanna, 1981; Reagan)

accessible attitudes:

have faster responses (reaction times)

how often their expressed � more often

 

Attitude strength and non-attitudes

c.f. Converse 1964

very difficult to tell attitudes and non-attitudes � indistinguishable

hence modest correlation between attitudes and behaviour

it depends how we ask the question, e.g. do you have an opinion on vs have you had the time to give some thought to the debate on � (25% say no now)