LECTURE 10: ATTITUDES AND PERSUASION

A TTITUDE

- An enduring evaluation, positive or negative, of a person, object, idea or behaviour

CHA LLENGE OF MEA SURIN G ATTITUDES

Self report measure

VANMAN ET AL (1997)
- Likert-scale: people rate the extend to which they agree or disagree with an evaluative
statement about a target - Used electromyography to measure electrical activity from facial muscle groups
o [I love broccoli – 1 strongly disagree to 7 strongly agree] - White volunteers viewed slides of White and Black people with whom they had to imagine
- Semantic Differential: people rate a target on a scale that runs between two polar interacting
opposite objectives - Direct self-report measures showed pro-Black bias
o [Broccoli – dislike -3 to like +3] - BUT… indirect measure showed more activity from “frown muscles” to Black photos –
negative evaluation
LaPiere (1934)
Priming measures
- spent two years travelling around the US with a young Chinese American couple
- they visited 250 hotels, caravan parks, tourist homes & restaurants, and were refused - Participants are shown an image and then a word. Their job is to decide whether the word
service in only one is “good” or “bad”
- after coming home, LaPiere contacted 128 of these places with questions: “Will you accept - Liked objects prime positivity …
members of the Chinese race as guests in your establishment?” o So, after priming something positive you should be quickly to identify “good”
- 92% said no, 7% were uncertain & only 1% said yes words, slow to identify “bad” words
- What people think not say as what people say & not the same as what they do - Disliked objects prime negativity…
o So, after priming something negative you should be quickly to identify “bad”
words, slow to identify “good” words
B OGUS PIPELINE

- Bogus = fake, pipeline = lie detector IMPLICIT A SSOCIA TION TEST (IA T)
- Give people questionnaire & strap with electrode = to do lie detection and can be able to
tell if they lie

THE FA CIA L ELECTROMYOGRAPH (EMG)

- An electronic instrument that records facial muscle activity associated with emotions and
attitudes
- “frowning” muscles = negative evaluation
- “smiling” muscles = positive evaluation
 - If negative view towards black people = slower response when “black & good” - Both discussion and discussants were rated more positively when given a severe shock =
more dissonance & more commited
W HERE DO A TTITUDES COME FROM?

Attitudes might emerge because of:

- Direct experience
- Associations (e.g., phobias, nostalgic memories) – “generalisation” in Little Albert
- Consequences for you (rewards and punishments)
- Observational learning (seeing rewards and punishments for others)
- Self-perception
- Rationalisations – e.g., moral attitude
o Rationalising moral intuitions/ disgust
- People who ditching = enjoy their high power
 Moral reasoning  moral judgement (traditional view)
- Social bonding effect & to show commitment
 “homosexual” think about life or contagious argument  anti-gay
 Moral judgement  moral reasoning (social intuitionist view)
 Got feeling that don’t like it about homosexuality  justify reasons MEAT-EATIN G & COGN ITIVE DISSONA N CE
or new belief to stand with judgement

RATION A LISING B EHAV IOUR

FESTINGER (1957)

- Inconsistencies between attitudes and behaviours create psychological tension – or

“cognitive dissonance”
- This feeling of dissonance is unpleasant, and we’re motivated to reduce it by either
changing our behaviour, or developing new attitudes that are consistent with our - Kids love animals  become vegan
behaviour
o E.g., smoke but know that it harmful = reduce it or generate attitude/belief to RATINGS OF MENTAL CAPACITY
not accept that

AROSON & MILLS (1959)

- Invited college women to listen to a group discussion on sex

- To gain permission to hear the group discussion, the women were told either
o There were no entry criteria
o They had to undergo a mild electric shock
o They had to undergo a strong electric shock
- To maximise dissonance, the subsequent discussion was designed to be boring
- Show picture of lamb & told: move to another farm and eating grass with other lambs OR
taken to be killed & sell meat to butcher
 - The more we think that animals have human capacity  deserve more protection
- If were told that animal have the capacity of human = reduce the attribute of human
capabilities – dehumanised animal
EGO- DEFENSIVE FUN CTION
- Sometimes attitudes are designed to make us feel good about ourselves: to protect our
self-esteem or to ward off guilt
- Many ego-defensive mechanisms lie outside conscious awareness … denial, repression,
projection and rationalisation are all example of ego-defensive attitudes that Freud was
interested in
V A LUE-EXPRESSIVE FUN CTION
- Value expressive attitudes are designed to project an idea of who we are … to
communicate an identity
- For example, if you see yourself as left-wing or a militant radical, you might cultivate
attitudes that are consistent with that self-image. Some of this is common sense… people
who are concerned about their carbon footprint might develop negative attitudes towards
cars
- This can also help explain why apparently random attitudes are often held in “clusters”, as
people take on the attitudes that best advertise who they are (e.g., environmentalist,
hipster)
KNOW LEDGE FUN CTION
- Sometimes attitudes serve the function of making the world more understandable and
predictable
- Examples of attitudes that serve this function are stereotypes (e.g., French men are
arrogant) and worldviews that make things fit together and make sense (e.g., I believe
good things happen to good people, so when I see a beggar in the street I think they
brought their problems on themselves)
UTILITARIAN FUN CTION
- Attitudes sometimes serve the utilitarian function of maximising reward and minimising
punishment
o Practical usefulness for you
- For example, business people may favour a political party that keeps taxes low, whereas
an unemployed person might favour a political party that protects welfare
SOCIAL A DJUSTIV E FUN CTION
- A subset of utilitarian attitudes is those that help us fit in: maximising social gains and
minimising the potential for rejection and isolation
- Both attitudes and behaviour are heavily influenced by what other people think you
should do (prescriptive norms) and what other people actually do (descriptive norms)
PERSUASION : DOES “LAYING DOWN THE LAW ” HELP?
PENNEBAKER & SANDERS (1976)
IV: type of bathroom sign
- Strong prohibition “do not write on these walls under any circumstances”
- Milder prohibition “please don’t write on these walls”
DV: amount of graffiti two weeks later
Findings: more graffiti when the sign was strongly worded
- The strong prohibition elicited reactance
- Performing the forbidden act restored a sense of freedom
Reactance in 2-year-olds and adults
- Two-year-old were put in a room with 2 equally attractive toys: one next to a transparent
barrier; one behind the barrier
- If the barrier was low, children were equally drawn to the two toys. But if the barrier was
high – requiring you to walk around it to reach the toy – the kids made contact with toys
3X faster than the easily accessible toy
- “boomerang” effects common among adults when it comes to censorship
o If they banned the movie = really want to watch it – to get the freedom
REA CTA N CE THEORY
- Strong prohibition threatens a person’s feeling of freedom
- Engaging in the forbidden behaviour is an attempt to restore that feeling of freedom
- Boomerang effect … people are now more likely to do the thing you are telling them not
to do
PERSUASION : DO GOOD ARGUMENTS WIN OUT?

- Good argument is accepted if people paying attention = not have time to process if not
motivated
- Easy to process the argument = no, peripheral processing – got a feeling whether it is right
or wrong based on superstitious thing

PERSUASION : CON SEN SUS IMPLIES CORRECTNESS

SOURCE EFFECTS

- People are more influenced by messages when they come from someone who:
o Is someone you like
- Any perception of reality – whether it be how long the line is, to how much pain you’re
o Is physically attractive
experiencing, to how funny a TV show is – can be influenced by the responses of the
o Is credible: doctors or professional advice
people around you
o Is similar to you
- This is used – and exploited – all the time by businesses, advertisers, and social scientists
[the powerful effect of norms]
TESTING THE ELM

- Participants told that their university is considering requiring comprehensive exams in NOLAN ET AL (2008): DOORS HANGERS DELIVERED TO CARLIFORNIAN HOUSEHOLDS
order to graduate
- Information only (control) – save energy by using a fan instead of air conditioning
- IVs:
- Self-interest – save money (up to $54 per month) by using fans instead of air-conditioning
o Personal Relevant/Involvement (implemented in 1 year/10 years)
- Environmental protection – protect the environment … decrease greenhouse gas
o Argument Quality (strong/weak arguments)
emissions by using fans instead of air-conditioning
o Source Credibility (Princeton education professor, high school students)
- Social responsibility – do your part … decrease your demand for electricity by using fans
- DV: attitude toward senior comprehensive exams
instead of air conditioning
- Descriptive norms  did not make strong argument, BUT just stated that “77% of
Content of argument matters when you care about it
residents often use fans instead of air conditioning to keep cool in summer”
When low relevant (not gonna affects you)  the credibility is important: agree with Princeton
professor > high school students
 - Most powerful = descriptive norms
- But when people were later interviewed, they judged the descriptive norm message as
least effective! – didn’t know they work - 19% science believe

PLURA LISTIC IGN ORAN CE

No one actually believes, but everyone believes that everyone else believes

- “The emperor’s new clothes”

Examples:

- Social influence explanations of the bystander effect (people infer that the people around
them are unconcerned when in fact privately everybody is concerned)
- Most people over-estimate what are “normal” levels of drinking at college
- In the 1920s people thought Americans were in support of prohibitions, when in fact
privately most Americans were against it Polls of biology teacher with creationist beliefs across countries – strongest in Africa
- In the 1950s Americans over-estimated “average” levels of support for segregation
- Students over-estimate the extent to which other students understand difficult material

UNDERSTAN DIN G AN D REDUCIN G AN TI-SCIEN TIFIC ATTITUDES

Irony …

- Despite being more educated and information-rich than ever, society holds some
stubbornly anti-science views

Poll Americans 2014 – view on evolution, where do human come from:

VACCINATION

- Pre-vaccine (numbers of disease = big number)

- After vaccine = % dropped! – greatest population health

Yet… the anti-vaccination movement is growing, with associated resurgences in rates of measles,
rubella, mumps and wooping cough

- Vaccination make us sick than better

GLOBAL TEMPERATURE CHANGE

STA NDA RD SCIENTIFIC RESPON SE?

Explication … if we just explain the evidence more, or more simply, or more convincingly, then
people would agree (the ‘deficit model’)

- DM: problem that people don’t understand the evidence when they get it

LIMITS TO THE DEFICITS MODEL

- No reliable relationship between understanding evolutionary theory and accepting it as

true
- Misconceptions about evolution appear difficult to change through formal instruction
- After being told that vaccinations are safe, two samples of German participants reported
more vaccination fears than in a control condition
- Exposure to arguments often leads to attitude polarisation … people become more
extreme in the direction of their pre-existing attitude
o More anti-death penalty

- Co2 causes temperature to increase BUT only small majority of people concerned about
consensus
 - The more educated people – the more oblige they are with climate change
- Conservative = reverse relationship

There is “solid evidence” of recent global warming due “mostly” to “human activity such as burning Attitude roots = reason why they want to reject science
fossil fuels” [agree, disagree]
V ESTED IN TEREST

People are more likely to resist a scientific message if there are negative consequences for them
believing it (e.g., energy company employees resisting climate change messages, smokers resisting
negative health message about smoking)

- Coffee good for you = benefit me, thus read it – but if it bad = sceptical

SEWING DOUBT THROUGH FALSE EXPERTS AND INFORMATION LAUNDERING

- Tobacco company invested it

- Mass murderer = still believe in global warming – not man made, not harmful cause it is
natural
- More science literate (liberal democrat) – more agree to climate change - Human impact is small, there is no consensus, warmer is better
- More get science = more sceptical (conservative republican) - Don’t have to have good argument

MOTIVATED REA SON IN G When people don’t realise there is scientific consensus, they’re less likely to support climate action.
This underscores the importance of closing the consensus gap
- People don’t act like cognitive scientists, carefully weighing up evidence. They behave
more like cognitive lawyers, focusing on only one side of the argument in an effort to
PERSONA L IDEN TITY EXPRESSION
defend their pre-existing worldview
- So, if people are motivated to reject the science, the repeating the science won’t help
The desire to communicate one’s true self might lend motivation to read scientific evidence in a
biased way. For example, superstitious beliefs may signal openness to experience (e.g., as “creative”
or “magical”)
- Fun when people believe = embrace superstitious belief
- Consequence for environment because it is fun
Another message that may be communicated by holding anti-scientific beliefs is that the attitude-
holder is not sheep-like in following prevailing beliefs (sheep = influenced by other things)
Should be particularly attractive for people high in trait reactance?
- Higher reactance, more belief in precognition
- People with high reactance = anti-vaxx (don’t like being told by other people)
IDEOLOGIES/ W ORLDV IEW S
People who believe in the free-market – or who are comfortable with the idea of society being split
into “haves” and have-nots” – might resist scientific messages that imply government intervention or
costs to big business (e.g., climate change)
What predicts scepticism about (anthropogenic) climate change?
- Demographic correlates were analysed using 25 representative polls/ surveys in Australia,
UK, Europe and US
- Other correlates were analysed by synthesising 171 academic studies across 56 nations
(total N = 217 337)
- More educated people most involved with climate science
- Its about worldview
SOCIAL IDENTITY N EEDS
If someone self-identifies as a member of a group that is science-sceptical, then people will be
motivated to absorb those attitudes for the usual social identity reasons: assimilation to ingroup
norms; polarisation away from outgroup norms; need for belonging/fear of rejection
CONSERVATIVES LOSING FAITH IN SCIENCE
 - For example, rather than trying to directly combat an attitude that’s based on core values
and ideologies, the goal would be to yield to those values and to use them to capture
attention and trigger change

FEYGINA, JOST & GOLDSMITH (2010): APPEALING TO CONSERVATIVES

Those higher in system justification tendencies are less environmental

- But a message that framed pro-environmental action as patriotic – conservative – (being

- Correlation with belief in climate change pro-environmental allows us to protect and preserve the American way of life) reversed
- Political affiliation (those who intend to vote conservative are more sceptical) > political that tendency
ideology (those with more conservative ideology more sceptical) > age > education >
income CAMPBELL & KAY (2014)

Belief in climate science rebounds among conservatives if they’re led to believe that global warming
CON SPIRATORIA L IDEA TION can be remedied by solutions that are free market friendly

- In order to make another party non-competitive – If favour orthodox view = more fund?
- Some people come to believe that it is possible for vast networks of people to execute
sinister plots in near-perfect secrecy. Over time, these beliefs can consolidate into a
unitary “conspiracist” worldview – The more you think it is A, the more B

FEARS/PHOB IAS

People who want to hide from the world that they have an excessive fear of needles and blood – or
an excessive fear of contamination – may be tempted to unify and legitimise those fear within a
philosophy that rejects the validity of techno-medical intervention
- Republicans believe that free-market – science
- 10% of needle disgust and sceptical
Effects of frames on environmental intentions
- If people are motivated to reject science, then explication is missing the point
- In the world of motivated reasoning, argumentation about evidence is a pointless charade;
analogous to shadow-boxing
o “each contestant lands heavy blows to the opponent’s shadow, then wonders
why she doesn’t fall down” (Haidt, 2001)

Jiu jitsu persuasion

- Rather than taking on people’s surface attitudes directly, the goal of jiu jitsu is to identify
the underlying motivation, and then to tailor the message so that it aligns with that
motivation