Essays
General Considerations and Requirements for the Essays
These are take-home essay questions. This implies that there are no “right” or “wrong” answers to the questions. Rather, what is required that you THINK about the course, the readings, class discussions, and the lectures, synthesize ideas, take positions on critical issues, reason through the available evidence, and construct the best possible case for the positions you take. This last point is perhaps the most important: There is a significant difference between holding an opinion and constructing an intellectually defensible, well-argued case for a position.
A well-defended case in support of a position identifies issues, defines key concepts, details arguments, marshals the available evidence, cites relevant readings, deals critically with potential objections, and makes careful, qualified claims. Moreover, a well-defended case is presented in the framework of a lucid and technically solid essay (i.e., a clear thesis or statement of purpose in the introduction; a preview of major points to be developed in the body of the essay; well-developed main points connected by internal summaries and transitions; a conclusion that summarizes and ties things together; good style, diction, and sentence structure; flawless spelling, etc.). Thus, although there are no right or wrong answers to this examination, there are clearly better and worse answers.
The format requirements are as below.
1. There is a firm page limit, and sometimes you should work to economize your style so that the questions can be answered in the allotted space.
2. The essay should be typed, double-spaced, one-inch margins, minimum of a 10-font and maximum of a 12-font.
3. Don’t forget the page numbers.
4. References to specific sources must be accompanied by appropriate citation.
5. APA (6th ed.) format for all citations.
6. A reference list should be at the end of essay.
7. Each essay should have a title page following APA specifications.
8. The title page and reference list DO NOT count as a part of the page limit; that limit pertains only to the text of your essay.
Essay #1- Due Tuesday, March 1st.
What are attitudes and why are they important in the study of persuasion and marketing? In responding to this question, include some discussion of relevant definitions, conceptual models of attitudes (including the structure and function of attitudes), means of assessing attitudes, and relationships of attitudes to various independent and dependent variables of interest. (5pages, cover page and the list of references)
Summary Persuasion: Theory and
Research - Daniel J. O\'Keefe
written by
pauliendh
The Marketplace to Buy and Sell your Study Material
On Stuvia you will find the most extensive lecture summaries written by your fellow students. Avoid
esits and get better grades with material written specifically for your studies.
www.stuvia.com
Downloaded by: beomjookim | XXXXXXXXXX
Distribution of this document is illegal
Chapter 1
Definitions have fuzzy edges (application of the concept is arguable).
It is possible to clarify a concept without having to be committed to a sharp-edged definition of
the concept. > By focusing on the shared features of paradigm cases of the concept.
Paradigm cases of a concept: instances that nearly everyone would agree were instances of the
concept.
Persuader
Persuadee: the one who is persuaded
Features of paradigm cases of persuasion:
1. When we say that one person persuaded another, we identify a successful attempt to
influence. (Success is embedded in the concept of persuasion)
2. In paradigm cases of persuasion, the persuader intends to influence the persuadee.
3. Measure of freedom (free will, free choice, voluntary act) on the persuadee’s part.
4. The effects are achieved through communication (and perhaps especially by language)
5. Involve a change in the mental state of the persuadee.
Thus even when a persuader’s aim is to influence what people do (what products they buy), at
least in paradigm cases of persuasion that aim is accomplished by changing what people think
(what they think of the product).
Definition of persuasion: a successful intentional effort at influencing another’s mental state
through communication in a circumstance in which the persuadee has some measure of
freedom.
Attitude: an evaluative judgment of (reaction to) an object.
Attitude is the most involved mental state in persuasion. Attitudes represent stable evaluations
that can influence behaviour, they are a common persuasive target.
Attitudes are important for persuasion.
Explicit measures
Simple, straightforward, easy to administer, easy to construct. But: it is just an estimate
(schatting) of the attitude. Achterliggende redenen komen niet aan bod.
- Semantic differential evaluative scales
Respondends rate the attitude object on a number of 7-point bipolar scales that are end-
anchored by evaluative adjective pairs (good-bad, positive-negative)
- Single-item attitude measures
A single questionnaire item that asks for the relevant judgment (extremely favourable –
extremely unfavourable). Potentially weak reliability. A person response to a single
attitude question may be not as good as the response on 3 or 4 items all getting the same
thing.
(e.g. public opinion surveys)
Stuvia.com - The Marketplace to Buy and Sell your Study Material
Downloaded by: beomjookim | XXXXXXXXXX
Distribution of this document is illegal
https:
www.stuvia.com
Stuvia.com - The Marketplace to Buy and Sell your Study Material
Quasi-explicit measures
Provide more information. But: may take more time to administer.
- Paired comparison
The respondent is asked a series of questions about the relative evaluation of each of a
number of pairs of object.
- Thurstone & Likert
The respondents attitude is derived from agreement or disagreement with statements
that are rather obviously attitude-relevant.
*Thurstone: a list of statements and asked to check the ones with which they agree
*Likert: The strength of agreement is assessed through some appropriate scale (e.g. this
ank is reliable, +3 strongly agree tm -3 strongly disagree)
It is important to select statements that help containing the right information. If you want to
learn about attitudes towards the United Nations, ‘’baseball is better than football’’ is not a good
statement.
Ranking techniques can give information about a large number of attitudes and provide insight
about comparative evaluations.
Implicit measures
Attitudes are being assessed. Most attractive in circumstances in which one fears respondents
may distort (verdraaien) their true attitudes.
- Autonomic responses (e.g. heart rate)
- Measures of
ain activity
- Priming measures (examining the speed with which people make evaluate judgments
when those judgments are preceded by the attitude object)
- Implicit association test (attitudes are assessed by examining the strength of association
etween attitude objects and evaluative categories)
- Etc.
Attitude en gedrag staan met elkaar in ve
and. Changing a person’s behaviour.. change that
person’s attitude.
Moderating factors of attitudes and behaviour consistency:
- The degree to which the behaviour is effortful or difficult
- The perceived relevance of the attitude to the behaviour
- Attitude accessibility
- Attitudinal ambivalence (tegenstrijdigheid)
- Having a vested interest in a position
- The extent of attitude-relevant knowledge
- Etc.
Co
espondence of measures
One factor that influences the observed consistency between an attitudinal measure and a
ehavioural measure is the nature of the measures involved.
Attitudinal measures and behavioural measures are likely to be rather more strongly associated
when there is a substantial co
espondence between the two measures and underscore the
foolishness of supposing that a single specific behaviour will necessarily or typically be strongly
associated with a person’s general attitude.
Stuvia.com - The Marketplace to Buy and Sell your Study Material
Downloaded by: beomjookim | XXXXXXXXXX
Distribution of this document is illegal
https:
www.stuvia.com
https:
www.stuvia.com
Stuvia.com - The Marketplace to Buy and Sell your Study Material
Direct experience
A second factor influencing attitude-behaviour consistency is the degree of direct experience
with the attitude object. Attitudes base on direct behavioural experience with the attitude object
have been found to be more predictive of later behaviour toward the object than are attitudes
ased on indirect experience.
Example: trial experience with a product (direct experience) – exposure to advertising messages
about a product (indirect experience)
But direct experience strengthens both positive and negative attitudes.
(Als je iets slechts over een voedings product hebt gelezen, zal je het eerder kopen dan wanneer
je al hebt geproefd dat het niet lekker is.)
Encouraging attitude-consistent behaviour
Sometimes a persuaders challenge is not to changes a person’s attitude but to get that person to
act on their attitude.
- Enhance perceived relevance
Encourage people to see their attitudes as relevant to their behavioural choices (control
condition vs. experimental condition)
‘’You might not have realized it, but this really is an opportunity to act consistently with
your attitude’’
- Induce feelings of hypocrisy
When persons have been hypocritical, one way of encouraging attitude-consistent
ehaviour can be to draw person’s attention to the hypocrisy. Leads people to recognize
their hypocrisy.
‘’You haven’t been acting consistently with your attitude, but here is an opportunity to do
so’’
- Encourage anticipation of feelings
Invite people to consider how they feel if they fail to act consistently with their attitudes
(regret and guilt).
‘’Here is an opportunity to act consistently with you attitude – and you think how bad
you will feel if you don’t.’’
Attitudes are not the only possible focus for persuasive efforts.
- Sometimes the focus of a persuasive effort will be some determinant of attitude, such as
a particular belief about the attitude product (e.g. that a product is environmentally
friendly)
- Sometimes persuaders want to influence some property of an attitude other than its
valence (negative or positive) and extremity > bijv: the salience (prominence,
accessibility), the confidence with which it is held or how it is linked to other attitudes.
(e.g. people already like a product the persuasive task is to ensure that those attitudes
are salient (activated) at the right time, for example reminding people of their attitudes)
Attitude strength a mixture of:
- Persistence – stronger attitudes are more persistence than weaker ones
- Resistance – stronger attitudes are more resistant to changes
- Impact on information processing and judgments – stronger attitudes are more likely to
affect such processes
- Impact on behaviour – stronger attitudes will have more effect on behaviour
Attitude change will often, but not always, be a persuaders goal.
Stuvia.com - The Marketplace to Buy and Sell your Study Material
Downloaded by: beomjookim | XXXXXXXXXX
Distribution of this document is illegal
https:
www.stuvia.com
https:
www.stuvia.com
Stuvia.com - The Marketplace to Buy and Sell your Study Material
Chapter 2: Social Judgment Theory (SJT)
The central tenet of social judgment theory is that messages produce attitude change through
judgmental processes and effects. More specifically, the claim is that the effect of a persuasive
communication depends upon the way in which the receiver evaluates the position it advocates.
Attitude change is seen as a two-step process: the receiver makes an assessment (beoordeling)
of what position is being advocated by the message, the attitude change occurs after this
judgment—with the amount and direction of change dependent on the judgment.
❖ Judgments of Alternative Positions on an Issue A person’s reaction to a persuasive message
depends on the person’s judgment of the position being advocated, then it is important to be
able to access persons’ judgments of the various possible options.
The Ordered Alternatives Questionnaire
Provides the respondent with a set of statements, each representing a different point of view in
the issue being studied. A
anged in order from one extreme to the other > ordered
alternatives.
The respondent is asked to indicate the statements that are acceptable or unacceptable, some
can be neither. These responses are said to form the person’s judgmental latitudes on that issue.
The range of positions that the respondent finds acceptable form the respondent’s latitude of
acceptance, unacceptable > the latitude of rejection and neither accepts or reject > the
latitude of noncommitment. SJT proposes that the structure of the judgmental latitudes
systematically varies depending on one’s level of ego-involvement with the issue.
Latitude =
eedtegraad
The Concept of Ego-Involvement
A person might be said to be ego-involved when the issue has personal significance to the
individual, when the person’s stand on the issue is central to his or her sense of self, when the
issue is important to the person, when the person takes a strong stand on the issue etc. SJT does
suggest that ego-involvement and position extremity will be empirically related, however, such
that those with more extreme positions on an issue will tend to be more ego-involved in that
issue.
Ego-Involvement and the Latitudes
The claim is that as one’s level of ego-involvement increases, the size of the latitude of rejection
will also increase and the sizes of the latitudes of acceptance and noncommitment will decrease.
Measures of Ego-Involvement
Several different techniques have been devised for assessing ego-involvement, examples:
- Size of the Ordered Alternatives Latitude of Rejection: latitude of rejection increase,
latitude of acceptance and noncommitment decrease. Latitude of noncommitment
shrinks more than the latitude of acceptance. This regularity has sometimes led to the
suggestion that the size of the latitude of noncommitment might serve as a measure of
ego-involvement, but the size of the latitude of rejection is the far more frequently
studied index.
- Own Categories Procedure: participants are presented with a large number of
statements (60 or more) on the topic and asked to sort statements into however many
categories they think necessary to represent the range of positions on the issue. Highly
involved participants > fewer categories. The fewer categories created, the greater the
degree of ego-involvement.
Stuvia.com - The Marketplace to Buy and Sell your Study Material
Downloaded by: beomjookim | XXXXXXXXXX
Distribution of this document is illegal
https:
www.stuvia.com
https:
www.stuvia.com
Stuvia.com - The Marketplace to Buy and Sell your Study Material
❖ Reactions to Communications
Assimilation and Contrast Effects
An assimilation effect is said to occur when a receiver perceives the message to be advocating
a position closer to his or her own position than it actually does; involves the receiver
minimizing the difference between the message’s and receiver’s position. A contrast effect is
said to occur when a receiver perceives the message to be advocating a position farther away
from his or her position than it actually does; involves the receiver’s exaggerating the
differences between the message’s and receivers position.
The perceived position of persuasive communication may be different for persons with differing
stands on the issue. Assimilation and contrast effects appear to be magnified by ego-involvement
- Receivers involvement increases > greater degree of perceptual distortion (vervorming).
- Higher ego-involvement > greater tendency toward perceptual distortion.
Attitude Change Effects
A communication that is perceived to advocate a position that falls in the latitude of acceptance
or noncommitment will produce attitude change in the advocated (message) direction, but a
communication that is perceived to advocate a position that falls in the latitude of rejection will
produce no attitude change and may even provoke “boomerang” (opposite message) attitude
change.
Inverted-U curve: relating discrepancy (tegenstrijdigheid) to attitude change.
Effective persuasion requires knowing more than the receiver’s most prefe
ed position; one
needs to also know the structure of the judgmental latitude. A persuasive message can fall in
one’s latitude of acceptance but the other persons latitude of rejection, even though they have
the same most prefe
ed position on the issue.
Assimilation and Contrast Effects Reconsidered
The attitude-change principles refer to what position the message is perceived to advocate.
Assimilation and contrast effects reduce the effectiveness of persuasive messages.
- The Impact of Assimilation and Contrast Effects on Persuasion: an assimilation
effect will reduce the perceived discrepancy between message’s view and receivers
position + it will reduce the amount of attitude change.
Persuaders can minimize assimilation and contrast effects by being clear about their
position on the persuasive issue at hand. Only relatively ambiguous communications are
subject to assimilation and contrast effects. Thus SJT emphasizes for persuaders the
importance of making one’s advocated position clear.
- Ambiguity in Political Campaigns: on the topic on which candidates seek persuasion,
namely who to vote for, candidates obviously take clear position. Candidates do
sometimes adopt ambiguous positions on “campaign issues”. Such ambiguity would
encourage assimilation and contrast effects, thereby damage the candidate’s chances of
changing anyone’s mind about that issue. But usually, candidates hope to encourage
voters to believe that the candidate’s view on a issue is the same as the voter’s view.
Adapting Persuasive Message to Recipients Using Social Judgment Theory
One recu
ing theme in theoretical analyses of persuasion is the idea to maximize effectiveness,
persuasive messages should be adapted to fit the audience. This especially means adapting
Stuvia.com - The Marketplace to Buy and Sell your Study Material
Downloaded by: beomjookim | XXXXXXXXXX
Distribution of this document is illegal
https:
www.stuvia.com
https:
www.stuvia.com
Stuvia.com - The Marketplace to Buy and Sell your Study Material
messages to the recipient’s judgmental latitudes. SJT also plainly suggests that messages need to
e adapted to the audience’s level of ego-involvement.
❖ Critical Assessment Several weaknesses in SJT and research have become apparent:
The Confounding of Involvement With Other Variables
One weakness is the use of participants from preexisting groups thought to differ in
involvement. The persons selected to serve as high-involvement participants differed from the
low-involvement participants not just in involvement but in other ways as well. Differences in
for example extreme attitudes by high-involvement participants, age, educational achievement,
etc.
According to SJT, ego-involvement and position extremity are distinct concepts.
The Concept of Ego-Involvement of Ego-Involvement
Ego-involvement runs together with a number of distinct concepts in an unsatisfactory manner.
It is possible to distinguish commitment to a position, importance of the issue, personal
elevance, and so forth, and hence a clear understanding of the roles these play in persuasion
will require separate treatment of each.
- I can hold a believe intensely, even though the issue isn’t important to me (the earth is
ound)
- An issue may not be personal relevant but still be strongly committed to a position on
that issue (abortion)
- I can hold a believe strongly, even though that belief isn’t central to my self-concept
(about the superiority of a soccer team)
The Measures of Ego-Involvement
Research concerning the common measures of ego-involvement (latitude of rejection in the
Ordered Alternative questionnaire and the number of categories created in the Own Categories
procedure) has revealed some wo
isome findings:
- The measures are not very strongly co
elated with each other. Normally they are. E.g.
negative co
elated: something increases, something else should decrease. The different
measures of involvement can not all be measuring the same thing.
- The measures do not display the expected patterns of association with other variables.
There are good ground for concern about the adequacy (voldoendheid) and meaning of the
common measures of ego-involvement. Expected > given the lack of clarity of the concept.
Stuvia.com - The Marketplace to Buy and Sell your Study Material
Downloaded by: beomjookim | XXXXXXXXXX
Distribution of this document is illegal
https:
www.stuvia.com
https:
www.stuvia.com
Stuvia.com - The Marketplace to Buy and Sell your Study Material
Chapter 3: Functional Approaches to Attitude
The most effective technique for changing an attitude may vary depending on the attitude’s
function.
❖ A Classic Functional Analysis
Katz (1960) proposed four attitude functions—concrete example of a functional analysis of
attitudes. Four attitude functions:
- Utilitarian: maximize rewards and minimize punishments.
- Ego-defensive: defending one’s self-image; removing threats to the ego or giving people
insight into their motivational dynamics.
- Value-expressive: getting satisfactions from holding and expressing attitudes that reflect
their central values and self-images.
- Knowledge: reflects the role of attitudes in organizing and understanding information
and events. E.g to understand complex political situations: identify the good guys and
the bad guys.
The analysis does not claim that the recommended means of changing each type of attitude will
e guaranteed to be successful, but only that a given attitude type is more likely to be changed
when approached with the right means of influence.
❖ Subsequent Developments
Identifying General Functions of Attitude
Social-adjustive function: attitudes help people adjust to social situations and groups; “allow
them to fit into important social situations and allow them to interact smoothly with their
peers”. There are more attitude functions (p.37) but consensus is lacking. A more general and
wider accepted distinction of functional typologies is:
Symbolic function: focus on the symbolic associations of the object. Expressing moral beliefs,
symbolizing significant values, projecting self-images etc.
Instrumental function: focus on the essential properties of the object. Summarizing the desirable
and undesirable aspects of an object.
E.g. topic: gun control in VS. Symbolic function: beliefs such as ‘’it represents progress toward a
more civilized world’’. Instrumental function: ‘’It will reduce crime because criminals wont be
able to get a gun so easily’’.
It is possible for people to have a mixture of these attitudes functions and they can also change
y time.
Assessing the Function of a Given Attitude
Given a typology of attitude functions, the question that naturally arises is how one can tell what
function an individual’s attitude is serving. One recu
ing (terugkerende) challenge facing
functional attitude theories has been the assessment of attitude functions:
- Coding (classifying) relevant free-response data (data from open-ended questions).
- The use of a questionnaire with standardized scale response items.
- Using proxy indices such as personality characteristics to stand in for more direct
assessment of functions. Self-monitoring refers to the control of one’s self presentation.
Stuvia.com - The Marketplace to Buy and Sell your Study Material
Downloaded by: beomjookim | XXXXXXXXXX
Distribution of this document is illegal
https:
www.stuvia.com
https:
www.stuvia.com
Stuvia.com - The Marketplace to Buy and Sell your Study Material
High-self monitors: are concerned about the image they project and tailor their conduct
to fit to particular circumstances (product image and favor social-adjustive functions)
e.g. ‘’I guess I put on a show to impress others.’’
Will likely stress (benadruk) the image-related aspects of the product > because of
social-adjustive function.
Low-self monitors: are less concerned about their projected image and mold their
ehavior to fit inner states (product quality and favor value-expressive functions)
e.g. ‘’I have trouble changing my behavior to suit different people.’’
Will likely focus on whether the product’s characteristics and qualities match the
persons criteria > value expressive functions.
Influences on Attitude Function
A variety of factors might influence the function that a given attitude serves, mentionable:
- Individual Differences: different persons can favor different attitudes functions (e.g.
different people can have different reasons for volunteering)
- Attitude Object: the function of an attitude toward an object may also be shaped by the
nature of the object because objects can differentially lend themselves to attitude
functions. (e.g. attitude airco > ‘’keeps the air cool.’’ This object encourage one attitude
function > unifunctional. Attitude car > ‘’provides reliable transportation’’ instrumental
function + ‘’looks sexy’’ symbolic function > multifunctional)
- Situational Variations: different situations can provoke different attitude functions;
attitude functions may vary depending on features of the immediate situation.
Adapting Persuasive Messages to Recipients: Function Matching
The persuasive messages should be adapted to fit the audience. This general idea is concretized
as the matching of the persuasive appeal to the functional basis of the recipient’s attitude.
• The Persuasive Effects of Matched and Mismatched Appeals
Matched appeals are more persuasive than mismatched appeals. Different aspects of a product
appeal to different types of people; image of the product - a social adjustive appeal, and quality
of the product - a value expressive appeal. High self-monitors react more favorably to image
than quality. The opposite for low self-monitors.
• Explaining the Effects of Function Matching
Why are function-matched appeals typically more persuasive than unmatched appeals? The
answer is not entirely clear, but there are two
oad possibilities
- Functionally matched appeals simply speak to a receiver’s psychological needs in ways
that unmatched appeals do not.
- Function-matched messages are processed more carefully than mismatched messages.
❖ Commentary Generality and Specificity in Attitude Function Typologies
There is not yet a consensus (overeenstemming) on any such set of functions, and perhaps there
never will be. However, functional analysis can still be used in illuminating attitudes and
persuasion processes, even without some universal scheme of attitude functions.
Stuvia.com - The Marketplace to Buy and Sell your Study Material
Downloaded by: beomjookim | XXXXXXXXXX
Distribution of this document is illegal
https:
www.stuvia.com
https:
www.stuvia.com
Stuvia.com - The Marketplace to Buy and Sell your Study Material
Functional Confusions
Some Functional Distinctions
There is some underlying fogginess in the conceptualization of attitude functions. This can be
displayed by considering that there are distinctions among:
- The functions of an attitude. E.g. John has unfavorable views about minorities. Having
that attitude makes him feel better about himself.
- The functions of expressing an attitude. E.g. John expressing that attitude might serve a
social-adjustive function > fitting in with people with similar attitudes.
- The functions of the attitude object. Functions of an attitude (what the evaluation does)
are different from functions of an object (what the object does).
Conflating (samenvallen) the Functions: these three elements are commonly conflated in theory
and research on attitude functions. The elements are not carefully distinguished.
Reconsidering the Assessment and Conceptualization of Attitude Function
Assessment of Attitude Function Reconsidered: the assessments may most directly reflect not
the function served by the respondent’s attitude but rather the respondent’s perceptions of the
functions served by the object and therefore the respondent’s perception of what is valuable
about the object. (e.g. asking people ‘’Whats right or wrong about X > varied answers >
differences in what people value).
High- and low-self monitors want different things from their consumer products, but both of
them uses their attitudes to identify good and bad products for them.
E.g. attitude functions of exercise
Utilitarian: ‘’Would help me reduce stress’’
Social-identity: ‘’Would help me improve my social relationships’’
Self-esteem maintenance: ‘’Would help me loose weight’’
Utilitarian and Value-Expressive Functions Reconsidered: against this backdrop, it may be useful
to reconsider how these functions have been conceptually differentiated. Value-Expressive
attitudes > abstract + prosocial. Utilitarian attitudes > concrete + self-enhancing (ve
eteren).
E.g. whether to make a charitable donation
Value-expressive attitude: ‘’The importance of helping others’’
Utilitarian attitude: ‘’Whether they can afford to donate’’
Both functions can be seen to distinguish cases on the basis of person’s values, not on the basis
of attitude function.
Maio and Olsen > goal-expressive attitudes: value-expressive and utilitarian into one functional
category.
Persuasion and Function Matching Revisited
Existing research concerning attitude functions and persuasive appeals appears to be well
captured by two core ideas.
1. What is valued varies. Different persons can have different values, different types of
objects are characteristically valued for different reasons, and as situations vary so can
the salience of different values.
Stuvia.com - The Marketplace to Buy and Sell your Study Material
Downloaded by: beomjookim | XXXXXXXXXX
Distribution of this document is illegal
https:
www.stuvia.com
https:
www.stuvia.com
Stuvia.com - The Marketplace to Buy and Sell your Study Material
2. Persuasive messages are more effective when they engage what people value than when
they do not.
Reviving the Idea of Attitude Functions
The value-based reframing of attitude functions focuses only on the object appraisal (taxatie)
attitude function. But overlooks the self-maintenance attitude function > Katz called it ego-
defensive function (a function of an attitude not of an attitude object)
There is a good reason to want to keep some version of the idea of different attitude functions,
as illustrated by the apparent usefulness of a contrast between object-appraisal functions and
self-maintenance functions. But if the idea of attitude function is to be revived (nieuw leven
ingeblazen), a consistent and clear focus on the functions of attitudes will be needed,
accompanied by attention to the continuing challenge of attitude unction assessment.
Chapter 4: Belief-Based Models of Attitude
The central theme of these approaches is that one’s attitude toward an object is a function of the
eliefs that one has about the object. Variations in this general approach:
- Differences in what features of beliefs are seen to contribute to attitude
- Differences in how beliefs are seen to combine to yield an attitude
❖ Summative Model of Attitude
The Model
This model is based on the claim that one’s attitude toward an object is a function of one’s
salient beliefs about the object. A person may have a large number of beliefs about an object, but
at any given time only some of them might be salient (prominent). Those determine one’s
attitude. The model distinguishes:
- Belief strength: how strong someone’s salient beliefs about an object are (likely-unlikely,
true-false)
- Belief evaluation: the evaluation of those beliefs, sort of someone’s opinion of these
eliefs (good-bad, favorable-unfavorable).
According to this formula people can have different beliefs and still have the
same attitude, because strength and evaluation differ.
A: attitude toward the object
B: strength of a given belief (hoezeer je denkt dat iets bestaat)
E: evaluation of a given belief (wat je daar vervolgens dan van vind)
Stigma: indicates that one sums across the products of the belief strength and belief evaluation
atings for each belief. 5 salient beliefs about an object, the attitude estimate is given by: b1e1 +
2e2 + b3e3 + b4e4 + b5e5
i x ei = biei (e.g. -3 x +3 = -9)
Adapting Persuasive Messages to Recipients Based on the Summative Model
The most common ways of persuading others is by making arguments that change the
ecipient’s beliefs in some way. The summative model of attitude points to a number of
alternative strategies for influencing attitude this way—and provide a systemic way of adapting
persuasive messages to audiences by identifying plausible foci (focus) for persuasive appeals.
Stuvia.com - The Marketplace to Buy and Sell your Study Material
Downloaded by: beomjookim | XXXXXXXXXX
Distribution of this document is illegal
https:
www.stuvia.com
https:
www.stuvia.com
Stuvia.com - The Marketplace to Buy and Sell your Study Material
Alternative Persuasive Strategies
Three
oad ways in which attitude might be changed:
- The evaluation of an existing salient belief might be changed > existing positive/
negative belief even more positively/negatively evaluated
- The strength (likelihood) of an existing salient belief might be changed. E.g. try the
weaken the strength of an existing negative belief.
- The set of salient beliefs might be changed > add a new belief of the appropriate valence
or to change the relative salience of existing beliefs.
Identifying Foci for Appeals
Identifying what kinds of appeals will likely be most appropriate for influencing a given message
ecipient. The summative model of attitude offers a framework within which persuaders can
think systematically about which persuasive appeals to make. Instead of selecting arguments
haphazardly (lukraak) and hoping to stumble into an effective appeal, persuaders can
methodically identify the most likely avenues to persuasive success.
❖ Research Evidence and Commentary
There are some questions regarding the summative model of attitude:
General Co
elational Evidence
The general evidence concerning the model: there is no compelling support for the claim that
attitude is determined by salient beliefs. Attitudes can sometimes be equally well predicted from
non-salient beliefs as from salient ones. So, belief assessments can indicate a person’s attitude
ut falls short of showing that attitudes are determined by salient beliefs.
Attribute Importance
The roles of attribute importance: the model uses only belief strength and belief evaluation to
predict attitude, some researches have thought that the predictability of attitude might be
improved by adding the importance or relevance of the attribute as a third variable. But the
evidence in hand suggests that adding relevance or importance to the summative formula does
not improve the predictability of attitude. Belief importance ratings may be crucial in permitting
the identification of those beliefs.
But enhancing the predictability of attitude is not the main research goal. Larger purpose:
illuminating how beliefs contribute to attitude. So, although belief importance might not add to
the predictability of attitude from ‘the summative formula’, belief importance ratings may be
crucial in permitting the identification of those beliefs that determine the respondent’s attitude.
Belief Content
The model offers what might be called a content-free analysis of the underpinnings of attitude.
That is the, for the summative model’s analysis, content of a belief is i
elevant; what matters is
simply how the belief is evaluated and how strongly it is held. The point is that the model
provides no systemic ways of thinking about belief content (image-oriented and quality-
oriented), although such content is manifestly important.
Example for differences in belief content: two car owners can both have positive attitudes about
a car but very different kinds of salient beliefs. One had beliefs about gas mileage and the other
about what identity is conveyed by the car.
This content is important for persuasion.
Stuvia.com - The Marketplace to Buy and Sell your Study Material
Downloaded by: beomjookim | XXXXXXXXXX
Distribution of this document is illegal
https:
www.stuvia.com
https:
www.stuvia.com
Stuvia.com - The Marketplace to Buy and Sell your Study Material