ATTITUDES
Elena M Zubieta (2020)
Summary:
1. INTRODUCTION
Attitudes have been, almost since the constitution of Social Psychology, one of the central topics of study of our discipline. So much
so that it has been said that without attitudes we would not be able to understand Social Psychology, especially in North American
production.
As Germani (1966) pointed out, the interest in this concept arises from our need to have categories that allow us to reduce the
complexity of social behavior and find its general causes. Attitudes are relevant in preventive campaigns and organizational
interventions, and their main interest lies in their role in processes of social change. They act as mediators between the individual
and his or her social context (Morales, Rebolloso, & Moya, 1994).
For Triandis (1971, in Echebarría et. al., 1987), attitude is an emotionally charged idea that predisposes to actions in specific social
situations. Fishbein and Ajzen (1975) argue that attitudes are learned predispositions to respond favorably or unfavorably to a
given object. Both definitions indicate that attitudes have an emotional and motivational aspect for actions directed toward a
specific object.
Attitudes can be organized into value systems. The term "ideology" designates an integrated set of beliefs and values that justify a
group's policies (Katz and Scottland, 1959; in Echebarría et. al., 1987).
Social attitudes are characterized by consistency in response to social objects, which facilitates the development of integrated
systems of attitudes and values. These systems help us interpret and evaluate facts, reducing ambiguity. They are perceptual styles
learned through the culture of belonging (Lindgren & Harvey, 1973).
2. MEASUREMENT AND DIMENSION OF ATTITUDES
To understand the internal composition of attitudes and their complexity, we can use Eagly and Chaiken's (1993) definition that
describes them as a psychological tendency expressed through the evaluation of an entity or object with some degree of
favorability or unfavorability.
By talking about tendency, it is implied that it is not something external to us or an overt and observable response, but an "internal
state." Attitude is then conceived as a mediator between the stimuli of the external environment and our reactions, i.e., our overt
evaluative responses.
Since attitude is an internal state, we must infer it from our overt and observable responses, which will be approval or disapproval,
attraction or rejection, approach, or avoidance, etc. In this evaluative tendency, we assign positive or negative aspects to a given
object, which transcends the merely descriptive and is, therefore, connotative.
Assessment involves valence (direction) and intensity. While valence refers to the positive or negative character that we attribute
to the attitudinal object, intensity is related to the gradation of that valence. For example, we may have a positive or negative
attitude toward a leader, but that character admits of varying degrees. It may also be that our attitude is indifferent or neutral
because we do not have a formed attitude (non-attitude) or because our attitude is ambiguous, admitting positive and negative
aspects with equal intensity. Thus, what is called the attitudinal continuum is represented, which integrates valence and intensity.
It is important to distinguish which attitudes are central to our value system and which are more marginal. Centrality is
complemented by salience, that is, the importance we give to each attitude in our lives. Not all core attitudes are equally salient.
1
Made by MatyBuda
, In addition, an attitude is always directed toward a specific object that must be clearly defined. The difference between having a
negative attitude toward a leadership style in general and toward the leadership of a specific person, such as Peter, illustrates that
the objects of our attitudes vary not only in content but also in level of specificity.
3. THE RESPONSES OR COMPONENTS OF THE ATTITUDE
The internal psychological state known as attitude manifests itself through observable responses that are traditionally classified
into three categories: cognitive, affective, and conative-behavioral. Although evaluation is a central characteristic of attitude, it can
be manifested through these three distinct pathways that always refer to a single internal state. This coexistence and the inner
complexity that this state implies are the reason these avenues of expression are also referred to as the elements or components
of attitude.
3.1 COGNITIVE RESPONSES
Often, we evaluate an object positively or negatively through thoughts or ideas that we call "beliefs." In a strict sense, "beliefs"
include both the thoughts and ideas themselves and their outward expression. According to Morales, Rebolloso and Moya (1994),
evaluation through cognitive responses follows a double sequence: first, we establish a probabilistic association between an object
and its attributes. For example, if we consider the bureaucratic organization and its attribute of rigidity, the first step would be to
establish the connection: "the bureaucratic organization has a probability (high/medium/low) of being made up of rigid
individuals." In the second step, we evaluate this association, based on the positive or negative connotation of the attribute. If
rigidity has a negative connotation, a strong association with bureaucratic organization would lead to a negative evaluation of the
latter.
3.2 AFFECTIVE RESPONSES
This includes the feelings, moods, and emotions associated with the object of our attitude. Although some authors have suggested
that emotion is the only component of attitude, it is clear that evaluation and affect are distinct concepts and that evaluation can
be manifested not only through affect, but also through cognitions and behaviors.
According to the consistency hypothesis, it is to be expected that a negative evaluation of the bureaucratic organization and the
rigidity of its members will be accompanied by negative feelings and emotions towards these expressions.
3.3 CONATIVE-BEHAVIOURAL RESPONSES
Behaviors can also be placed on the attitudinal continuum. Some behaviors can be terribly negative, such as avoiding interacting
with rigid individuals, while others can be incredibly positive, such as collaborating in the actions proposed by Peter's situational
leadership. In attitudinal studies, in addition to considering behavior itself, behavioral intentions are also considered, such as
agreement to support Peter's leadership style or disagreement to interact with an organization due to its bureaucratic rigidity.
3.4 THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN EVALUATIVE RESPONSES OR ATTITUDINAL COMPONENTS
From a theoretical point of view, attitude is an internal state of evaluation, while the cognitive, affective, and conative-behavioral
components are the ways in which it is expressed. Methodologically, although these components are different from each other,
they all refer to the same variable: attitude. Each type of attitudinal response can be measured with different indices, but they
must be positively related to adequately reflect the attitude in question.
2
Made by MatyBuda
Elena M Zubieta (2020)
Summary:
1. INTRODUCTION
Attitudes have been, almost since the constitution of Social Psychology, one of the central topics of study of our discipline. So much
so that it has been said that without attitudes we would not be able to understand Social Psychology, especially in North American
production.
As Germani (1966) pointed out, the interest in this concept arises from our need to have categories that allow us to reduce the
complexity of social behavior and find its general causes. Attitudes are relevant in preventive campaigns and organizational
interventions, and their main interest lies in their role in processes of social change. They act as mediators between the individual
and his or her social context (Morales, Rebolloso, & Moya, 1994).
For Triandis (1971, in Echebarría et. al., 1987), attitude is an emotionally charged idea that predisposes to actions in specific social
situations. Fishbein and Ajzen (1975) argue that attitudes are learned predispositions to respond favorably or unfavorably to a
given object. Both definitions indicate that attitudes have an emotional and motivational aspect for actions directed toward a
specific object.
Attitudes can be organized into value systems. The term "ideology" designates an integrated set of beliefs and values that justify a
group's policies (Katz and Scottland, 1959; in Echebarría et. al., 1987).
Social attitudes are characterized by consistency in response to social objects, which facilitates the development of integrated
systems of attitudes and values. These systems help us interpret and evaluate facts, reducing ambiguity. They are perceptual styles
learned through the culture of belonging (Lindgren & Harvey, 1973).
2. MEASUREMENT AND DIMENSION OF ATTITUDES
To understand the internal composition of attitudes and their complexity, we can use Eagly and Chaiken's (1993) definition that
describes them as a psychological tendency expressed through the evaluation of an entity or object with some degree of
favorability or unfavorability.
By talking about tendency, it is implied that it is not something external to us or an overt and observable response, but an "internal
state." Attitude is then conceived as a mediator between the stimuli of the external environment and our reactions, i.e., our overt
evaluative responses.
Since attitude is an internal state, we must infer it from our overt and observable responses, which will be approval or disapproval,
attraction or rejection, approach, or avoidance, etc. In this evaluative tendency, we assign positive or negative aspects to a given
object, which transcends the merely descriptive and is, therefore, connotative.
Assessment involves valence (direction) and intensity. While valence refers to the positive or negative character that we attribute
to the attitudinal object, intensity is related to the gradation of that valence. For example, we may have a positive or negative
attitude toward a leader, but that character admits of varying degrees. It may also be that our attitude is indifferent or neutral
because we do not have a formed attitude (non-attitude) or because our attitude is ambiguous, admitting positive and negative
aspects with equal intensity. Thus, what is called the attitudinal continuum is represented, which integrates valence and intensity.
It is important to distinguish which attitudes are central to our value system and which are more marginal. Centrality is
complemented by salience, that is, the importance we give to each attitude in our lives. Not all core attitudes are equally salient.
1
Made by MatyBuda
, In addition, an attitude is always directed toward a specific object that must be clearly defined. The difference between having a
negative attitude toward a leadership style in general and toward the leadership of a specific person, such as Peter, illustrates that
the objects of our attitudes vary not only in content but also in level of specificity.
3. THE RESPONSES OR COMPONENTS OF THE ATTITUDE
The internal psychological state known as attitude manifests itself through observable responses that are traditionally classified
into three categories: cognitive, affective, and conative-behavioral. Although evaluation is a central characteristic of attitude, it can
be manifested through these three distinct pathways that always refer to a single internal state. This coexistence and the inner
complexity that this state implies are the reason these avenues of expression are also referred to as the elements or components
of attitude.
3.1 COGNITIVE RESPONSES
Often, we evaluate an object positively or negatively through thoughts or ideas that we call "beliefs." In a strict sense, "beliefs"
include both the thoughts and ideas themselves and their outward expression. According to Morales, Rebolloso and Moya (1994),
evaluation through cognitive responses follows a double sequence: first, we establish a probabilistic association between an object
and its attributes. For example, if we consider the bureaucratic organization and its attribute of rigidity, the first step would be to
establish the connection: "the bureaucratic organization has a probability (high/medium/low) of being made up of rigid
individuals." In the second step, we evaluate this association, based on the positive or negative connotation of the attribute. If
rigidity has a negative connotation, a strong association with bureaucratic organization would lead to a negative evaluation of the
latter.
3.2 AFFECTIVE RESPONSES
This includes the feelings, moods, and emotions associated with the object of our attitude. Although some authors have suggested
that emotion is the only component of attitude, it is clear that evaluation and affect are distinct concepts and that evaluation can
be manifested not only through affect, but also through cognitions and behaviors.
According to the consistency hypothesis, it is to be expected that a negative evaluation of the bureaucratic organization and the
rigidity of its members will be accompanied by negative feelings and emotions towards these expressions.
3.3 CONATIVE-BEHAVIOURAL RESPONSES
Behaviors can also be placed on the attitudinal continuum. Some behaviors can be terribly negative, such as avoiding interacting
with rigid individuals, while others can be incredibly positive, such as collaborating in the actions proposed by Peter's situational
leadership. In attitudinal studies, in addition to considering behavior itself, behavioral intentions are also considered, such as
agreement to support Peter's leadership style or disagreement to interact with an organization due to its bureaucratic rigidity.
3.4 THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN EVALUATIVE RESPONSES OR ATTITUDINAL COMPONENTS
From a theoretical point of view, attitude is an internal state of evaluation, while the cognitive, affective, and conative-behavioral
components are the ways in which it is expressed. Methodologically, although these components are different from each other,
they all refer to the same variable: attitude. Each type of attitudinal response can be measured with different indices, but they
must be positively related to adequately reflect the attitude in question.
2
Made by MatyBuda
