Attitude is an evaluation, which is either positive or negative in nature having three basic components of affection, behaviour and cognition, varying from person to person in intensity. Therefore, attitudes can be distinguished from beliefs, which are cognitions about the characteristics of objects (Fish & Ajzen, 1975); whereas attitudes are reflections of that belief about that object, it refers to one’s thought pattern. A large part of social psychology has focused on how attitudes are formed and how they can be changed. These theories can largely be grouped into the following:
1. Learning theories use the learning principles of classical and instrumental conditioning to explain the process of formation and change of attitude (Doob, 1947). For classical conditioning, a neutral stimulus is paired with an unconditioned stimulus over successive occasions, which automatically results in the former beginning to elicit a similar response to that produced by the unconditioned stimulus. Objects, events or people associated with pleasant experiences may take on favourable evaluations while those associated with negative experiences may be evaluated negatively. For example- Initially, people may be neutral toward a particular brand’s label picture. However after repeatedly pairing the product’s logo with an “unconditioned stimulus” that was a specific celebrity endorser who is already liked by the target audience with the new brand, a memory link between the two can be established, which is eliciting positive attitudes on its own (Sweldens, van Osselaer, & Janiszewski, 2010).
For instrumental conditioning, reward consequences of any behaviour shape its enhancement thereby helping formation or change of attitude. Behaviours or events that are positively rewarded always seem to strengthen and increase in occurrence when compared to the ones which aren’t.
Observational learning mechanisms of social comparison also impact individuals’ acquired attitudes. According to learning theorists, attitudes are also known to be formed on the basis of our tendency to compare ourselves with others to determine whether our view of social reality is or is not correct (Festinger, 1954). In order to be similar to others we like, we accept or adopt their attitude to the extent that we identify with that group. For example, Terry and Hogg (1996) found that the adoption of favourable attitudes toward wearing sunscreen depended on the extent to which the respondents identified with the group advocating this change. As a result of observing the attitudes held by others with who we identify, new attitudes can be formed.
2. Consistency theories include balance theories and cognitive dissonance theory.
Balance theory by Heider (1958), involves the relationship between a person and two attitude objects; where all the three elements are connected by either favourable or unfavourable attitudes. The basic tenet of this theory is that there is the tendency to maintain or restore balance in one’s attitude structure as unbalanced structures are somehow uncomfortable. Thus, explaining the process of attitude formation and change. For example – if you have two friends who are not acquainted, you probably assume that they will like each other once they are introduced. Or if you dislike someone, you will assume that your friends will also dislike the person (Aronson & Cope, 1968). A balanced state is one in which the elements fit together harmoniously.
Cognitive Dissonance theory by Leon Festinger (1957), is elaborated on the assumption that humans strive for harmony among elements in their cognitive or thought structures. The magnitude of dissonance is dependent upon the importance of the elements and lack of fit becomes greater. There are two major ways for a person to reduce dissonance – Either, it can be done by changing one of the cognitive elements; or, it can be done by adding a new cognitive element. This theory has several applications in its field, one such is the effects of counter-attitudinal behaviour called attitude-discrepant behaviour. When a person holds a belief and performs a task that is inconsistent with it, then dissonance is produced. As it is difficult to take back the action itself, the created dissonance is relieved by changing the existing attitude for the same. For example – If a person has a cognitive element such as “smoking is injurious to health” but behaviourally, he is a smoker; this particular situation creates a dissonance. Consonant is only known to exist when his cognitive element of smoking being a health hazard matches his behaviour, that is he himself is a non-smoker. Festinger and Carlsmith’s (1959) study illustrated that dissonance is stronger when one has little justification for their attitude inconsistent behaviour. In contrast, stronger reasons (or larger rewards) can produce less attitude change—the less-leads-to-more effect—because the person feels justified in their attitude–inconsistent behaviour in that case.
3. The last group of theory of attitude formation is the Cognitive – Response Approach, which focuses on the recipient of the new information to explain the above-mentioned process. They explain that the recipient not only merely receives or reacts to the new incoming information, but they in fact also generate thoughts about that information. These thoughts can increase, neutralise or reverse the intended impact of the information. In the light of this approach, Greenwald (1968) gave the cognitive response analysis explaining that the recipient goes beyond processing the information passively, by actively reacting to the new information along with their own personal thought. Cognitive-response approaches also focus on the role of the person’s cognitive organisation in determining how the information is interpreted, remembered and retrieved. For example – Watching a television advertisement about a particular food item can evoke many personal thoughts in a person, now depending upon which type of positive, negative or neutralising emotions that food item evoked will decide if or not the person will give that item a try.
– Urveez Kakalia and Annesha Datta.