Download Chapter 13 Class Notes

GENERAL PSYCHOLOGY
Chapter 13
Social Psychology
Attitudes: Formation and Change
Attitudes: the tendency to respond favorably or unfavorably to a person, object or event. Attitudes are
composed of three components including:
 Cognitive component -- the belief that something is either good or bad (example: "I think people should
have the right to protect themselves by carrying concealed handguns")
 Affective component -- the emotions felt which substantiate the belief (example: "It makes me angry to
realize that criminals carry guns all the time but law abiding citizens can't legally carry handguns"),
 Behavioral component -- the tendency to act in certain ways based on the cognitive and affective parts of
an attitude (ex: "I'm going to go out and vote in the referendum on carrying concealed handguns").
Attitude Formation: In order to have an attitude toward something, a person must have:
 Knowledge -- If you do not know about a piece of handgun legislation currently being debated in congress,
you cannot have a favorable or unfavorable attitude about this legislation.
 Relevance -- If you have been attacked and robbed recently, and you think carrying a concealed handgun
is a good thing, the issue of carrying a gun will be more relevant to you than to others who have not been
mugged. Therefore, you will likely have a stronger attitude than most on this issue due to its personal
relevance to your life.
Attitude Change: In order to persuade others to change their attitudes, communication must be persuasive.
Two main factors in persuasive communication are:

Source of the Message -- the communicator must have:
o Expert Knowledge (relevant experience, degrees, etc...)
o Honest, Trustworthy Character (must be seen as sincere & not just trying to benefit self)
o Appropriate Body Language (eye contact, confident posture and speech)

Content of the Message -- in giving the message, one should:
o Deal With Both Sides of the Issue (must logically explain why other way of thinking is wrong & your
way is right)
o Repeat the main message over and over
o Use only the strongest arguments
o Create an Emotional Reaction the primary attitude changing emotion is fear, but a lower fear
approach has been shown to be more effective than high fear tactics)

Audience Factors – communicators are more persuasive when the audience has:
o Low View Discrepancy
o Low Commitment to Present Beliefs
o Low Self-Esteem
Cognitive Dissonance Theory (proposed by Leon Festinger, 1961)
In general, CD theory asserts that if you can get people to change their behavior, a change in attitude in favor
of that behavior will likely follow. More specifically, Festinger notes that when a person voluntarily does a
behavior contrary to his attitude, the result will be cognitive dissonance -- or –mental discord & confusion.
Since cognitive dissonance is an unpleasant experience, the person is motivated to get rid of it. In order to get
rid of CD, the person can either change the behavior to match the attitude (eliminating the dissonance), or
change the attitude to conform to the behavior. In most cases, the person will likely change the attitude to
match the behavior that he is doing. Thus, CD, being an unpleasant mental experience, often spurs on a
change in attitude so the attitude will match the behavior resulting in elimination of the dissonance. Festinger's
classic experiment involved getting subjects to agree to lie to other subjects about the boring peg turning task.
Some told the lie for $20, others agreed to lie for $1. The $20 liars had sufficient justification for their behavior
(therefore no dissonance) and they maintained their original attitude that the peg turning task was very boring.
The $1 liars did not have sufficient reason to tell the lie (therefore creating great dissonance) and they were
motivated to change their attitude about the boring task to match the lie that in was interesting and fun. In
order to get rid of the dissonance, the $1 liars had to change their original attitude ("the task was boring"), to
match what they had told the other subjects ("the task was interesting").
Also, note that CD only occurs when a person voluntarily does a behavior that contradicts an attitude. If you
force someone hates motorcycles to ride one, no dissonance will occur. However, if this person voluntarily
agrees to ride the motorcycle, CD will likely result, and the person will be motivated to get rid of it -- most likely
by changing the attitude toward favoring motorcycles.
Attribution Theory
Attribution Theory is used to explain how we perceive the behavior of others, as well as our own behavior. In
general, the attribution theory is based on the idea that in attempting to understand behavior, we assign a
reason why the person did the behavior. That is, we "attribute" the behavior to some cause.
Attributions can be either:

Internal Attributions -- thinking the behavior was caused by internal forces -- the behavior related to the
personal character of the individual -- "that's just the type of person he is" --assumes the person, rather
than the social situation, controlled the behavior.

External Attributions -- thinking the behavior was caused by external forces -- the behavior was caused by
the social situation, rather than the person's character -- "anyone would have done the same thing in that
situation" -- assumes the situation, rather than the person, controlled the behavior.
Attribution Bias
While there are many factors which regulate attributions, there are also several attributional biases which
commonly lead people to errors in perceiving the causes of behavior. Some of these biases include:
 The Fundamental Attribution Error (FAE) -- the tendency to overestimate internal (personality) causes and
underestimate external (situational) causes when explaining the behavior of others. Example: when
viewing on TV the actions of the people rioting in the Los Angeles streets following the Rodney King
verdict, most observers tend to automatically attribute the violent behavior to the "criminal, hoodlum,
personalities" of the rioters. Note: due to the AOB (see below), the rioters likely explained their own
behavior as being caused not by a deviant personality, but rather by the social situation of the moment.

The Actor-Observer Bias (AOB) -- the tendency to overestimate external (situational) causes and
underestimate internal (personality) causes when explaining our own behavior -- example: when asked
why he stole money from the cash register at work, a man replies "I did it because my boss doesn't pay me
enough to pay my monthly bills" -- the thief is not likely to say he steals because he has an evil, corrupt,
cheating personality.

Self-Serving Bias (SSB) -- the tendency to quickly take credit for our successes but blame failures on
factors beyond our control -- when a student makes an A on a psychology exam he concludes "I busted my
butt to make that A" -- the same student then makes an F on a history exam and concludes "My teacher is
horrible. You never know what she wants on those tricky exam questions she uses!"

Defensive Bias – the tendency of an observer to over emphasize internal attributions and blame victims of
misfortune for their fate because it may reduce anxiety that the same bad fortune may happen to the
observer. For example, when neighbor has her purse snatched in a mall parking lot, a woman may think
“It’s kind of her own fault for walking alone into the mall at night.” As a result, the observer’s own anxiety
regarding being a crime victim is reduced because it distances facilitates the idea that it could’nt happen to
her.
Social Influences on Behavior
Conformity: Behavior change which results from indirect social pressures -- no one person asks or
commands another person to change behavior as in compliance and obedience -- be sure to read about
Solomon Asch's famous conformity experiment in the text.
Social Influences on Behavior, continued…
Obedience: Behavior change which results from the direct command of a perceived figure of authority -remember from the beginning of the semester our discussion of Stanley Milgram's famous "shock generator"
experiments conducted at Yale University in the 1960s -- you can read more about this classic experiment in
the text.
Compliance: Behavior change which results from the direct request of another (non-authority figure) individual
-- initiating a behavior by simply asking someone to do something -- there are several techniques people
(especially salespersons) use to get others to comply with their wishes including:
 Foot-in-the-Door Technique -- Getting someone to comply to a small request results in the likelihood they
will agree to much larger request later. Research indicates that people who agree to small requests will be
much more likely to agree to a larger request later. Example: A door-to-door vacuum cleaner seller first
asks "May I have 10 minutes of your time to demonstrate this fantastic vacuum cleaner?" If you agree to
this small request, (the seller knows) you will be much more likely to agree later to the larger request of
"Will you help me out and BUY A VACUUM CLEANER TODAY?"
 Door-in-the-Face Technique – Involves first asking someone for an outrageous request (that is sure to be
denied) results in the increased likelihood they will agree to a smaller, more reasonable request later (but
what you originally wanted). Research indicates that people who turn down another person on a large
request, will later feel more obligated to agree to a smaller request. Example: Wife asks husband "Will
you mow the lawn, trim the shrubs, clean out the garage and wash the car on Saturday?" Husband says
"Hell no! That's my only day off." Wife comes back with "Well, will you at least agree to mow the lawn?"
(This is all she wanted in the first place). Husband replies "O.K. That sounds more reasonable." By using
this technique, the wife is virtually guaranteed to get her husband to do all she wanted in the first place.
 That's Not All Technique -- Making someone a reasonable offer to begin with and then (virtually
guaranteeing compliance) by offering something additional as an extra bonus. Example: A late night TV
commercial offers an entire set of Ginsu knives for $19.95, and you think "that's a pretty good deal." Just
then, the announcer says "But wait! If you order now, you'll also receive a set of Ginsu steak knives and a
Ginsu orange juicer FREE!" You think "With all of that, I'd be a fool to pass up such a deal." Then you dial
the 1-800 number and order the knives. In reality, the knife seller would have probably included the extras
anyway, just making you think you're getting a really good deal.
 Reciprocity -- If you do something nice for a person, or give a person a "gift" up front, that person will be
more likely to comply to a request later (even minutes later). Example: For years, certain religious cult
members have approached people at airports and initiated contact by giving the passerby a "gift," such as
a book or a flower. Moments later, the cult member is asking the passerby for a donation to their cause.
 Low-ball Technique -- This approach involves getting a person to agree to the terms of a deal or contract
and then, just before initiating the deal, one of the two persons adds an additional, "last minute,"
conditional term to the deal. We know that once the deal is set in motion, the party who must bend to meet
the last minute, additional demand is much more likely to agree than if the demand was made as a part of
the original deal. Example: Car dealers are notorious for using this technique. First, they get you to agree
to a price for the vehicle, then, at the last minute, they add an extra condition to the deal which always
involves more money on your part. They know that, in your mind, you've already bought the vehicle, and
you are not going to back out of the deal now. In essence, they've got you!
Altruism (Helping Behavior)
When a person helps another person (usually a stranger), with no expectation of getting anything in return.
There are many factors related to which person and what situations produce altruistic behavior. These include:
 The Helper -- Persons who have recently come into good fortune and persons who feel especially guilty
are more likely to give help to others.


The Person in Need of Help -- Persons more likely to receive help are those who are:
o those recognized as needing help
o those perceived as worthy of help
o persons perceived as being especially physically attractive
The Situation -- The situation most likely to elicit help is one in which the person needing help and the
potential helper are the only two persons in sight -- Crowded area tend to produce what social
psychologists call the "bystander effect."