Excellent study material for all civil services aspirants - being learning - Kar ke dikhayenge!
SHARE:
Attitude: content, structure and function - Part 1
1.0 Introduction
Attitudes have long been considered a central concept of social psychology. In fact, early writers have defined social psychology as the scientific study of attitudes (e.g., Thomas & Znaniecki, 1918) and in 1954 Gordon Allport noted, "This concept is probably the most distinctive and indispensable concept in contemporary American social psychology". As one may expect of any concept that has received decades of attention, the concept of attitudes has changed over the years. The initial definitions were broad and encompassed cognitive, affective, motivational, and behavioral components. For example, Allport (1935) defined an attitude as "a mental and neural state of readiness, organized through experience, exerting a directive and dynamic influence upon the individual's response to all objects and situations with which it is related". A decade later, Krech and Crutchfield (1948) wrote, "An attitude can be defined as an enduring organization of motivational, emotional, perceptual, and cognitive processes with respect to some aspect of the individual's world".
1.1 Definitions of attitude
An attitude can be defined as a positive or negative evaluation of people, objects, event, activities, ideas, or just about anything in your environment, but there is debate about precise definitions. Eagly and Chaiken, for example, define an attitude "a psychological tendency that is expressed by evaluating a particular entity with some degree of favor or disfavor". Though it is sometimes common to define an attitude as affect toward an object, affect (i.e., discrete emotions or overall arousal) is generally understood to be distinct from attitude as a measure of favorability.
Because of the various aspects of the definition of attitudes, the evaluation of an attitude object varies from extremely negative to extremely positive. At the same time, people can also be conflicted or ambivalent toward an object. They might at different times express both positive and negative attitude toward the same object. This has led to some discussion of whether individual can hold multiple attitudes toward the same object.
Whether attitudes are explicit (i.e., deliberately formed) versus implicit (i.e., subconscious) has been a topic of considerable research. Research on implicit attitudes, which are generally unacknowledged or outside of awareness, uses sophisticated methods involving people's response times to stimuli to show that implicit attitudes exist (perhaps in tandem with explicit attitudes of the same object). Implicit and explicit attitudes seem to affect people's behavior, though in different ways. They tend not to be strongly associated with each other, although in some cases they are. The relationship between them is poorly understood.
1.2 Jung's definition
Attitude is one of Jung's 57 definitions in Chapter XI of Psychological Types. Jung's definition of attitude is a "readiness of the psyche to act or react in a certain way". Attitudes very often come in pairs, one conscious and the other unconscious. Within this broad definition Jung defines several attitudes.
The main (but not only) attitude dualities that Jung defines are the following:
- Consciousness and the unconscious. The "presence of two attitudes is extremely frequent, one conscious and the other unconscious. This means that consciousness has a constellation of contents different from that of the unconscious, a duality particularly evident in neurosis"
- Extraversion and introversion. This pair is so elementary to Jung's theory of types that he labeled them the "attitude-types".
- Rational and irrational attitudes. "I conceive reason as an attitude"
- The rational attitude subdivides into the thinking and feeling psychological functions, each with its attitude.
- The irrational attitude subdivides into the sensing and intuition psychological functions, each with its attitude. "There is thus a typical thinking, feeling, sensation, and intuitive attitude".
- Individual and social attitudes Many of the latter are "isms".
In addition, Jung discusses the abstract attitude. Abstraction is contrasted with creationism. "Creationism means a peculiarity of thinking and feeling which is the antithesis of abstraction".
2.0 Attitudes: Content & Structure
The most influential model of attitude has been the multicomponent model. According to this perspective, attitudes are summary evaluations of an object that have Cognitive, Affective, and Behavioral components. We like to think of these components as a taxi CAB that will get you where you want to go. A number of researchers have considered how the CAB components contribute to the formation and expression of attitudes.
The cognitive component of attitudes refers to the beliefs, thoughts, and attributes we associate with an object. In many cases, a person's attitude might be based primarily upon the positive and negative attributes they associate with an object. For example, when one buys a new car, considerable attention is devoted to different vehicles' safety records, gas mileage, and repair costs. Attitudes toward the different cars are formed through a methodical consideration of the positive and negative characteristics of each car. Similarly, an individual's favorable attitude toward a particular politician might be based on the belief that the politician is charismatic, intelligent, and has economic policies that promote social equality.
The behavioral component of attitudes refers to past behaviors or experiences regarding an attitude object. For instance, people might guess that they must have a negative attitude toward factory farming, if they remember having signed a petition against the unethical treatment of animals. The idea that people might infer their attitudes from their previous actions was best articulated by Daryl Bem. According to Bem's (1972) self-perception theory, individuals do not always have access to their opinions about different objects and sometimes infer their attitudes by thinking about how they have behaved with respect to the attitude object in the past.
3.0 Measurement of Attitude
Attitude researchers have used a number of techniques to measure these components.
3.1 Semantic measures
The first type of measure we want to discuss is the semantic differential approach to the measuring of attitudinal components. We have already learned that researchers often use semantic differential scales such as positive-negative and good-bad to measure overall attitudes. This framework can also be used to measure the cognitive and affective components of attitude. Most often, researchers using semantic differential scales to assess cognition and affect have either developed "generic" semantic differential dimensions that can be used to assess cognitive or affective information toward different types of attitude objects, or have used the same semantic differential dimensions to assess both cognitive and affective responses toward a particular attitude object (and change the instructions so that they highlight either cognition or affect).
In contrast to the generic approach, Breckler and Wiggins (1989) used the same semantic differential scales to assess both cognition and affect for a particular object, but framed the scales differently. For instance, in assessing cognitive and affective reactions toward blood donation, Breckler and Wiggins (1989) measured cognitions by having participants respond to the stem "Blood donation is" on the dimensions bad-good, wise-foolish, useless-useful, and important-unimportant. Affective responses toward this object were assessed by having participants respond to the stem "Blood donation makes me feel" on the same semantic differential scales.
There are many benefits to the semantic differential approaches to measuring attitudinal components. First, they are simple to administer and complete. Second, when they use the same dimensions across different attitude objects (as in the method of Crites and colleagues), they can be used to compare the favorability of responses across attitude objects. That said, there are also some problems with this type of measure. Most importantly, the attentive reader will have noticed that the semantic differential measures mentioned only the cognitive and affective components. The diffuse nature of behavior has made it difficult for researchers to imagine valid semantic differential scales for this component.
3.2 Open ended measures
A second type of measure uses open-ended questions to measure all three attitudinal components. In this technique, participants are asked to write down the thoughts, feelings, and behavioral experiences they associate with an attitude object. A second type of measure uses open-ended questions to measure all three attitudinal components. In this technique, participants are asked to write down the thoughts, feelings, and behavioral experiences they associate with an attitude object.
While there are many positive aspects of open-ended measures of attitudinal components, this type of measure is not without its difficulties. For example, participants may find it hard to articulate the thoughts, feelings, and past experiences they associate with a particular attitude object, meaning that they might not provide any responses for one or more components. Similarly, these measures require more time and effort from participants. If researchers are interested in measuring cognitions, affective responses, and past behaviors for many attitude objects, it might not be feasible to use the open-ended approach.
In addition to the affective, cognitive and behavioral components, attitudes also have other properties & Content. Four significant properties of attitudes are: Valence (positivity or negativity), Extremeness, Simplicity or Complexity (multiplicity), and Centrality.
Valence (positivity or negativity) : The valence of an attitude tells us whether an attitude is positive or negative towards the attitude object. 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 nor bad), and 4 (Good), to 5 (Very good). If an individual rates her/his view towards nuclear research as 4 or 5, this is clearly a positive attitude. This means that the person likes the idea of nuclear research and thinks it is something good. On the other hand, if the rating is 1 or 2, the attitude is negative. This means that the person dislikes the idea of nuclear research, and thinks it is something bad. We also allow for neutral attitudes. In this example, a neutral attitude towards nuclear research would be shown by a rating of 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 as extreme as a rating of 5 : they are only in the opposite directions (valence). Ratings of 2 and 4 are less extreme. A neutral attitude, of course, is 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 'member' attitudes. In case of various topics, such as health and world peace, people hold many attitudes instead of single attitude.
An attitude system is said to be 'simple' if it contains only one or a few attitudes, and 'complex' if it is made up of many attitudes. Consider the example of attitude towards health and well-being. This attitude system is likely to consist of several 'member' attitudes, such as one's concept of physical and mental health, views about happiness and well-being, and beliefs about how one should achieve health and happiness. By contrast, the attitude towards a particular person is likely to consist of mainly one attitude. The multiple member-attitudes within an attitude system should not be confused with the three components described earlier. Each member attitude that belongs to an attitude system also has A-B-C components.
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) attitudes 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 attitude system.
Attitudes have to be distinguished from two other closely related concepts, namely, beliefs and values. Beliefs refer to the cognitive component 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. One example of a value is the idea that one should work hard, or that one should always be honest, because honesty is the best policy. Values are formed when a particular belief or attitude becomes an inseparable part of the person's outlook on life. Consequently, values are difficult to change.
4.0 The Function of Attitude
The four basic functional areas in humans of attitudes are:
Knowledge: Attitudes provide meaning (knowledge) for life. The knowledge function refers to our 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 organize and structure our experience. Knowing a person's attitude helps us predict their behavior. For example, knowing that a person is religious we can predict they will go to Temple.
Self / Ego-expressive: The attitudes we express
- help communicate who we are and
- may make us feel good because we have asserted our identity.
Self-expression of attitudes can be non-verbal too: think bumper sticker, cap, or T-shirt slogan. Therefore, our attitudes are part of our identity, and help us to be aware through expression of our feelings, beliefs and values.
Adaptive: If a person holds and/or expresses socially acceptable attitudes, other people will reward them with approval and social acceptance. For example, when people flatter their seniors in administration or organization or instructors (and believe it) or keep silent if they think an attitude is unpopular. Again, expression can be nonverbal [think politician kissing baby]. Attitudes then, are to do with being apart of a social group and the adaptive functions helps us fit in with a social group. People seek out others who share their attitudes, and develop similar attitudes to those they like.
The ego-defensive function: The ego-defensive function refers to holding attitudes that protect our self-esteem or that justify actions that make us feel guilty. For example, People whose pride has suffered following a defeat in sport might similarly adopt a defensive attitude: "I'm not bothered, I'm sick of exams anyway…" This function has psychiatric overtones. Positive attitudes towards ourselves, for example, have a protective function (i.e. an ego-defensive role) in helping us reserve our self-image.
The basic idea behind the functional approach is that attitudes help a person to mediate between their own inner needs (expression, defense) and the outside world (adaptive and knowledge).
COMMENTS