This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed.Find sources: "Attitude" psychology – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR (September 2021) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)
This article needs to be updated. Please help update this article to reflect recent events or newly available information. (November 2022)
Two children at a playground talking and demonstrating a positive attitude.

In psychology, attitude is a psychological construct that is a mental and emotional entity that inheres or characterizes a person, their attitude to approach to something, or their personal view on it. Attitude involves their mindset, outlook and feelings.[1] Attitudes are complex and are an acquired state through life experience. Attitude is an individual's predisposed state of mind regarding a value and it is precipitated through a responsive expression towards oneself,[2] a person, place, thing, or event (the attitude object) which in turn influences the individual's thought and action.

Most simply understood attitudes in psychology are the feelings individuals have about themselves and the world. Prominent psychologist Gordon Allport described this latent psychological construct as "the most distinctive and indispensable concept in contemporary social psychology."[3] Attitudes can be formed from a person's past and present.[3] Key topics in the study of attitudes include attitude strength, attitude change, consumer behavior, and attitude-behavior relationships.[4][5]



In social psychology, an attitude is an evaluation of an object, ranging from extremely negative to extremely positive. An attitude can belong to both or either a conscious and unconscious mental state. [6] Most contemporary perspectives on attitudes permit that people can also be conflicted or ambivalent toward an object by simultaneously holding both positive and negative attitudes toward the same object. This has led to some discussion of whether an individual can hold multiple attitudes toward the same object.[7] Additionally, attitude can be defined as a set of emotions or beliefs towards a person, place or event.[8] Attitude can have many different variations of characteristics each one unique in different ways. Researchers suggest that some attitudes are inherited via genetic transmission from our parents.[9]Attitude can also be referred to evaluations in terms of a preference for or against an object. This is commonly in terms such as like, dislike, prefer or hate. When individuals express their attitudes such as "I like to go hiking," or "I hate bugs," individuals are expressing the relationship between the object and oneself and this can be identified as either positive or negative. Attitudes are an important part of how we perceive our behaviors and unique characteristics. Likewise, attitudes can have a profound effect on a person's behavior.

An attitude can be a positive or negative evaluation of people, objects, events, activities, and ideas. Several researchers[10] agree that attitude can be described as a settled and unchanging way of thinking, feeling, or observing people, places, events, or objects. It can be about something which is concrete or abstract. However, there is a debate about precise definitions. "In psychotherapy and counseling, the client’s feeling of rejection or disapproval of the therapist or counselor."[11]  When an individual chooses to respond positively to a situation, they tend to assess situations in a more positive manner and they recognize that they cannot change the past. However, decisions made in the future can impact what happens next. These individuals tend to pay attention to the good in situations rather than the bad. As for an individual with a negative attitude they are more likely to respond to a situation negatively and they tend to look back on a problem. They become so engulfed on the problem they cannot move forward from it. These individuals tend to have a hard time finding the good in situations or event, ignore the good, and focus on the bad in people and in situations. Eagly and Chaiken, for example, define an attitude as "a psychological tendency that is expressed by evaluating a particular entity with some degree of favor or disfavor."[12] 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 as an evaluative structure used to form an attitude object.[13] Attitude may influence the attention to attitude objects, the use of categories for encoding information and the interpretation, judgement and recall of attitude-relevant information.[14] These influences tend to be more powerful for strong attitudes which are accessible and based on elaborate supportive knowledge structure. The durability and impact of influence depend upon the strength formed from the consistency of heuristics.[14] Attitudes can guide encoding information, attention and behaviors, even if the individual is pursuing unrelated goals.

Jung's definition

Attitude is one of Carl Jung's 57 definitions in Chapter XI of Psychological Types. Jung defines attitude as a "readiness of the psyche to act or react in a certain way".[15] Attitudes often come in pairs, one conscious and the other unconscious. Within this broad definition, Jung defines several attitudes. The attitude-types, extroversion, and introversion are elementary to Jung's theory of types. He also described a duality of individual and social attitudes.[clarification needed]

Jung "[conceived] reason as an attitude", and defined rational and irrational as another attitude duality.[15] 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. Jung's attitude types are then expanded into four different types of function: Intuiting, Thinking, Sensing, and Feeling.[16]

In addition, Jung discusses the abstract attitude: "Abstraction is contrasted with concretism. By this I mean a peculiarity of thinking and feeling which is the antithesis of abstraction".[15]

Introversion and Extroversion

There are two opposing sides to Carl Jung's definition of attitude. Carl Jung believed that there were eight functions of attitude, and two attitude types: introversion and extroversion. [17] People who belong to the introverted attitude type tend to focus inwardly. Other traits and characteristics of introversion may include a tendency towards more inner-reflection and enjoying being alone. Extroverted people have a tendency to draw their energy from other people and interact with the world at a much larger rate than introverts. [18]


The attitude of a person is determined by psychological factors like ideas, values, beliefs, perception, etc. All these have a complex role in contributing to a person's attitude. Values are ideals, guiding principles in one's life, or overarching goals that people strive to obtain.[19] There are many factors that influence attitude such as social factors, family, personal experience, direction instruction, prejudices, media, religious and educational institutions, physical factors and economic factors and occupations.[20] Social factors are influenced by individuals and how they are expected to behavior in social settings referring to societal norms. Family has a huge impact on an individual's attitude whether developing a positive or negative attitude this can be difficult to change. when direction instruction is given to an individual this influences attitude for example a dangerous animal is equivalent to being bad and to run away and fruit is equivalent to being good to eat. prejudices are attitudes that are unbiased opinions prejudged without knowing all of the facts, prejudices can be toward objects, people etc. Mass media plays a role in shaping individual's beliefs and opinions with the help of the radio, television, and social media. religious and educational institutions have a strong influence on shaping attitudes understanding and moral concepts are building blocks for these institutions. In terms of physical factors clinical psychologists have identified that all factors of health are important in attitude adjustment. such ailments such as malnutrition,[21] diseases even accidents can seriously interfere with the disturbance of normal development. Lastly, economic status and occupations contribute to attitude formation this influences individual's attitudes towards unions and management, the belief that certain laws are considered good or bad.[20]

Beliefs are cognitive states about the world—subjective probabilities that an object has a particular attribute or that an action will lead to a particular outcome.[22] Beliefs can be patently and unequivocally false. For example, surveys show that a third of U.S. adults think that vaccines cause autism, despite the preponderance of scientific research to the contrary.[23][24] It was found that beliefs like these are tenaciously held and are highly resistant to change. Another important factor that affects attitude is symbolic interactionism, these are rife with powerful symbols and charged with affect which can lead to a selective perception. Persuasion theories say that in politics, successful persuaders convince its message recipients into a selective perception or attitude polarization for turning against the opposite candidate through a repetitive process that they are in a noncommittal state and it is unacceptable and does not have any moral basis for it and for this they only require to chain the persuading message into a realm of plausibility.


This section needs expansion. You can help by adding to it. (September 2012)

The classic, tripartite view offered by Rosenberg and Hovland[25] is that an attitude contains cognitive, affective, and behavioral components. Empirical research, however, fails to support clear distinctions between thoughts, emotions, and behavioral intentions associated with a particular attitude.[26] A criticism of the tripartite view of attitudes is that it requires cognitive, affective, and behavioral associations of an attitude to be consistent, but this may be implausible. Thus some views of attitude structure see the cognitive and behavioral components as derivative of affect or affect and behavior as derivative of underlying beliefs.[27] "The cognitive component refers to the beliefs, thoughts, and attributes associated with an object". "The affective component refers to feelings or emotions linked to an attitude object". "The behavioral component refers to behaviors or experiences regarding an attitude object".[28] An example of cognitive component would be people's beliefs in things such as "an apple a day keeps the doctor away", "love at first sight", religious beliefs and an attitude towards believing that snakes carry venom and are dangerous. an example of affective component is a newborn baby being laid is on its mother's chest for the first time for skin-to-skin contact or an attitude towards not liking insects. and finally, an example of the behavioral component would be when going hiking I try to avoid bears, if I see one I will start to scream.

Despite debate about the particular structure of attitudes, there is considerable evidence that attitudes reflect more than evaluations of a particular object that vary from positive to negative.[29][30] Among numerous attitudes, one example is people's money attitudes which may help people understand their affective love of money motive, stewardship behavior, and money cognition. These ABC components of attitudes formulate, define, and contribute to an overall construct of Monetary Intelligence which, in turn, may be related to many theoretical work-related constructs.[31][32][33][34]

Intra-attitudinal and inter-attitudinal structures

There is also considerable interest in intra-attitudinal and inter-attitudinal structure,[35] which is how an attitude is made (expectancy and value) and how different attitudes relate to one another. Intra-attitudinal structures are how underlying attitudes are consistent with one another. This connects different attitudes to one another and to more underlying psychological structures, such as values or ideology. Unlike intra-attitudinal structures, inter-attitudinal structures involve the strength of relations of more than one attitude within a network.[10]

Attitude component model

An influential model of attitude is the multi-component model, where attitudes are evaluations of an object that have affective (relating to moods and feelings), behavioral, and cognitive components (the ABC model).[36] The affective component of attitudes refers to feelings or emotions linked to an attitude object. Affective responses influence attitudes in a number of ways. For example, many people are afraid or scared of spiders. So this negative affective response is likely to cause someone to have a negative attitude towards spiders. The behavioral component of attitudes refers to the way an attitude influences how a person acts or behaves. The cognitive component of attitudes refers to the beliefs, thoughts, and attributes that a person associates with an object. Many times a person's attitude might be based on the negative and positive attributes they associate with an object. As a result of assigning negative or positive attributes to a person, place, or object, individuals may behave negatively or positively towards them.[37]

MODE model

The MODE [38](motivation and opportunity as determinants of the attitude-behavior relation) model was developed by Fazio. The MODE model, in short is a theory of attitude evaluation that attempts to predict and explain behavioral outcomes of attitudes. When both are present, behavior will be deliberate. When one is absent, impact on behavior will be spontaneous. A person's attitude can be measured explicitly and implicitly. The model suggests whether attitude activation occurs and, therefore, whether selective perception occurs depends on attitude accessibility. More accessible attitudes are more likely to be activated in a behavioral situation and, therefore, are more likely to influence perceptions and behavior[39]

Explicit measures are attitudes at the conscious level, that are deliberately formed and easy to self-report. Implicit measures are attitudes that are at an unconscious level, that are involuntarily formed and which a person is typically unaware of.[40] Both explicit and implicit attitudes can shape an individual's behavior.[41] Implicit attitudes, however, are most likely to affect behavior when the demands are steep and an individual feels stressed or distracted.[42]


Another classic view of attitudes is that attitudes serve particular functions for individuals. That is, researchers have tried to understand why individuals hold particular attitudes or why they hold attitudes in general by considering how attitudes affect the individuals who hold them.[43] Daniel Katz, for example, writes that attitudes can serve "instrumental, adjustive or utilitarian," "ego-defensive," "value-expressive," or "knowledge" functions.[44] This functional attitude theory suggests that in order for attitudes to change (e.g., via persuasion), appeals must be made to the function(s) that a particular attitude serves for the individual. As an example, the ego-defensive function might be used to influence the racially prejudicial attitudes of an individual who sees themselves as open-minded and tolerant. By appealing to that individual's image of themselves as tolerant and open-minded, it may be possible to change their prejudicial attitudes to be more consistent with their self-concept. Similarly, a persuasive message that threatens self-image is much more likely to be rejected.[45]

Daniel Katz classified attitudes into four different groups based on their functions.

  1. Utilitarian: provides general approach or avoidance tendencies
  2. Knowledge: organizes and interprets new information
  3. Ego-defensive: protects self-esteem
  4. Value-expressive: expresses central values or beliefs


People adopt attitudes that are rewarding and that help them avoid punishment. In other words, any attitude that is adopted in a person's own self-interest is considered to serve a utilitarian function. For example, a person who has a condo would pay property taxes. If that leads to an attitude that "increases in property taxes are bad", then the attitude is serving a utilitarian function.


Several studies have shown that knowledge increases are associated with heightened attitudes that influence behavior.[46] The framework for knowledge is based on significant values and general principles. Attitudes achieve this goal by making things fit together and make sense. As a result, people can maintain a sense of stability and meaning within their worldview. For example:

  1. I believe that I am a good person.
  2. I believe that good things happen to good people.
  3. Something bad happens to Bob.
  4. So, I believe Bob must not be a good person.

When a person is relying on a single dimension of knowledge and that dimension is not directly related to their behavior goal, that person might conclude that the attitude is wrong.[46]


This function involves psychoanalytic principles where people use defense mechanisms to protect themselves from psychological harm. Mechanisms include denial, repression, projection, and rationalization.

The ego-defensive notion correlates with Downward Comparison Theory, which argues that derogating a less fortunate other increases a person's own subjective well-being. A person is more likely to use the ego-defensive function when they suffer a frustration or misfortune.


Identity and social approval are established by central values that reveal who we are and what we stand for. Individuals define and interpret situations based on their central values. An example would be attitudes toward a controversial political issue.


According to Doob in 1947,[47] learning can account for most of the attitudes a person holds. The study of attitude formation is the study of how people form evaluations of persons, places or things. Theories of classical conditioning, instrumental conditioning and social learning are mainly responsible for formation of attitude. Unlike personality, attitudes are expected to change as a function of experience. In addition, exposure to the 'attitude' objects may have an effect on how a person forms his or her attitude. This concept was seen as the mere-exposure effect. Robert Zajonc showed that people were more likely to have a positive attitude on 'attitude objects' when they were exposed to it frequently than if they were not. Mere repeated exposure of the individual to a stimulus is a sufficient condition for the enhancement of his attitude toward it.[48] Tesser in 1993[49] argued that hereditary variables may affect attitudes - but believes that they do so indirectly. For example, consistency theories, which imply that beliefs and values must be consistent. As with any type of heritability, to determine if a particular trait has a basis in genetics, twin studies are used.[50] The most famous example of such a theory is Dissonance-reduction theory, associated with Leon Festinger, which explains that when the components of an attitude (including belief and behavior) are at odds an individual may adjust one to match the other (for example, adjusting a belief to match a behavior).[51] Other theories include balance theory, originally proposed by Heider in 1958, and the self-perception theory, originally proposed by Daryl Bem.[52]


Main article: Attitude change

Attitudes can be changed through persuasion and an important domain of research on attitude change focuses on responses to communication. Experimental research into the factors that can affect the persuasiveness of a message include:

Emotion and attitude change

Emotion is a common component in persuasion, social influence, and attitude change. Much of attitude research emphasized the importance of affective or emotion components. Emotion works hand-in-hand with the cognitive, or thought, process about an issue or situation. Emotional appeals are commonly found in advertising, health campaigns and political messages. Recent examples include no-smoking health campaigns and political campaign advertising emphasizing the fear of terrorism. Attitudes and attitude objects are functions of cognitive, affective and cognitive components. Attitudes are part of the brain's associative networks, the spider-like structures residing in long-term memory that consist of affective and cognitive nodes.

By activating an affective or emotion node, attitude change may be possible, though affective and cognitive components tend to be intertwined. One may be able to change their attitudes with attitude correctness, which varies with the level of confidence they have in their attitude validity and accuracy. In general, the higher the confidence level, the more the person believes others around them should share the same attitude. As we learn other people share those attitudes and how socially acceptable, they are, the importance of attitude correctness becomes even more apparent.[56] Our attitudes can greatly impact our behavior and the manner of how we treat those around us. In primarily affective networks, it is more difficult to produce cognitive counterarguments in the resistance to persuasion and attitude change. The idea of attitude clarity refers to a feeling of security or uncertainty about a particular attitude, a feeling strengthened by the act of reporting one's particular attitude towards an issue or thing, which will make that attitude more crystallized.[56]

Affective forecasting, otherwise known as intuition or the prediction of emotion, also impacts attitude change. Research suggests that predicting emotions is an important component of decision making, in addition to the cognitive processes. How a person feels about an outcome may override purely cognitive rationales.

In terms of research methodology, the challenge for researchers is measuring emotion and subsequent impacts on attitude. Various models and measurement tools have been constructed to obtain emotion and attitude information. Measures may include the use of physiological cues like facial expressions, vocal changes, and other body rate measures. For instance, fear is associated with raised eyebrows, increased heart rate and increase body tension.[57] Other methods include concept or network mapping and using primes or word cues in the era.

Components of emotional appeals

Any discrete emotion can be used in a persuasive appeal; this may include jealousy, disgust, indignation, fear, blue, disturbed, haunted, and anger. Fear is one of the most studied emotional appeals in communication and social influence research.

Important consequences of fear appeals and other emotional appeals include the possibility of reactance which may lead to either message rejections or source rejection and the absence of attitude change. As the EPPM suggests, there is an optimal emotion level in motivating attitude change. If there is not enough motivation, an attitude will not change; if the emotional appeal is overdone, the motivation can be paralyzed thereby preventing attitude change.

Emotions perceived as negative or containing threat are often studied more than perceived positive emotions like humor. Though the inner-workings of humor are not agreed upon, humor appeals may work by creating incongruities in the mind. Recent research has looked at the impact of humor on the processing of political messages. While evidence is inconclusive, there appears to be potential for targeted attitude change is receivers with low political message involvement.

Important factors that influence the impact of emotional appeals include self-efficacy, attitude accessibility, issue involvement, and message/source features. Self efficacy is a person's perception of their agency or ability to deal with a situation. It is an important variable in emotional appeal messages because it dictates a person's ability to deal with both the emotion and the situation. For example, if a person is not self-efficacious about their ability to impact the global environment, they are not likely to change their attitude or behavior about global warming.

Dillard in 1994[57] suggested that message features such as source non-verbal communication, message content, and receiver differences can impact the emotion impact of fear appeals. The characteristics of a message are important because one message can elicit different levels of emotion for different people. Thus, in terms of emotional appeals messages, one size does not fit all.

Attitude accessibility refers to the activation of an attitude from memory in other words, how readily available is an attitude about an object, issue, or situation. Issue involvement is the relevance and salience of an issue or situation to an individual. Issue involvement has been correlated with both attitude access and attitude strength. Past studies conclude accessible attitudes are more resistant to change.

Attitude-behavior relationship

The effects of attitudes on behaviors is a growing research enterprise within psychology. Icek Ajzen has led research and helped develop two prominent theoretical approaches within this field: the theory of reasoned action[58] and, its theoretical descendant, the theory of planned behavior.[59] Both theories help explain the link between attitude and behavior as a controlled and deliberative process.

Theory of reasoned action

The theory of reasoned action (TRA) is a model for the prediction of behavioral intention, spanning predictions of attitude and predictions of behavior. The subsequent separation of behavioral intention from behavior allows for explanation of limiting factors on attitudinal influence.[60] The theory of reasoned action was developed by Martin Fishbein and Icek Ajzen,[22][58] derived from previous research that started out as the theory of attitude, which led to the study of attitude and behavior. The theory was "born largely out of frustration with traditional attitude–behavior research, much of which found weak correlations between attitude measures and performance of volitional behaviors".[61]

Theory of planned behavior

The theory of planned behavior suggests that behaviors are primarily influenced by the attitude and other intentions. The theory of planned behavior was proposed by Icek Ajzen in 1985 through his article "From intentions to actions: A theory of planned behavior."[62] The theory was developed from the theory of reasoned action, which was proposed by Martin Fishbein together with Icek Ajzen in 1975. The theory of reasoned action was in turn grounded in various theories of attitude such as learning theories, expectancy-value theories, consistency theories, and attribution theory. According to the theory of reasoned action, if people evaluate the suggested behavior as positive (attitude), and if they think their significant others want them to perform the behavior (subjective norm), this results in a higher intention (motivation) and they are more likely to do so. A high correlation of attitudes and subjective norms to behavioral intention, and subsequently to behavior, has been confirmed in many studies. The theory of planned behavior contains the same component as the theory of reasoned action, but adds the component of perceived behavioral control to account for barriers outside one's own control.[63]

Motivation and Opportunity as Determinants (MODE)

Russell H. Fazio proposed an alternative theory called "Motivation and Opportunity as Determinants" or MODE. Fazio believes that because there is deliberative process happening, individuals must be motivated to reflect on their attitudes and subsequent behaviors.[64] Simply put, when an attitude is automatically activated, the individual must be motivated to avoid making an invalid judgement as well as have the opportunity to reflect on their attitude and behavior.

A counter-argument against the high relationship between behavioral intention and actual behavior has also been proposed, as the results of some studies show that, because of circumstantial limitations, behavioral intention does not always lead to actual behavior. Namely, since behavioral intention cannot be the exclusive determinant of behavior where an individual's control over the behavior is incomplete, Ajzen introduced the theory of planned behavior by adding a new component, "perceived behavioral control." By this, he extended the theory of reasoned action to cover non-volitional behaviors for predicting behavioral intention and actual behavior.


In 1928 Louis Leon Thurstone published an article titled "Attitudes Can Be Measured" in it he proposed an elaborate procedure to assess people's views on social issues. Attitudes can be difficult to measure because measurement is arbitrary, because attitudes are ultimately a hypothetical construct that cannot be observed directly.

But many measurements and evidence proofed scales are used to examine attitudes. A Likert scale taps agreement or disagreement with a series of belief statements. The Guttman scale focuses on items that vary in their degree of psychological difficulty. The semantic differential uses bipolar adjectives to measure the meaning associated with attitude objects. Supplementing these are several indirect techniques such as unobtrusive, standard physiological, and neuroscientific measures.[65] Following the explicit-implicit dichotomy, attitudes can be examined through direct and indirect measures.

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.


Explicit measures tend to rely on self-reports or easily observed behaviors. These tend to involve bipolar scales (e.g., good-bad, favorable-unfavorable, support-oppose, etc.).[66] Explicit measures can also be used by measuring the straightforward attribution of characteristics to nominate groups. Explicit attitudes that develop in response to recent information, automatic evaluation were thought to reflect mental associations through early socialization experiences. Once formed, these associations are highly robust and resistant to change, as well as stable across both context and time. Hence the impact of contextual influences was assumed to be obfuscate assessment of a person's "true" and enduring evaluative disposition as well as limit the capacity to predict subsequent behavior.[67] Likert scales and other self-reports are also commonly used.


Implicit measures are not consciously directed and are assumed to be automatic, which may make implicit measures more valid and reliable than explicit measures (such as self-reports). For example, people can be motivated such that they find it socially desirable to appear to have certain attitudes. An example of this is that people can hold implicit prejudicial attitudes, but express explicit attitudes that report little prejudice. Implicit measures help account for these situations and look at attitudes that a person may not be aware of or want to show.[68] Implicit measures therefore usually rely on an indirect measure of attitude. For example, the Implicit Association Test (IAT) examines the strength between the target concept and an attribute element by considering the latency in which a person can examine two response keys when each has two meanings. With little time to carefully examine what the participant is doing they respond according to internal keys. This priming can show attitudes the person has about a particular object.[69] People are often unwilling to provide responses perceived as socially undesirable and therefore tend to report what they think their attitudes should be rather than what they know them to be. More complicated still, people may not even be consciously aware that they hold biased attitudes. Over the past few decades, scientists have developed new measures to identify these unconscious biases.[70]

See also


  1. ^ Richard M. Perloff, The Dynamics of Persuasion: Communication and Attitudes in the Twenty-First Century, Routledge, 2016.
  2. ^ PhilPapers, Responsibility and Reactive Attitudes
  3. ^ a b Allport, Gordon. (1935). "Attitudes," in A Handbook of Social Psychology, ed. C. Murchison. Worcester, MA: Clark University Press, 789–844.
  4. ^ Lynn R. Kahle, Pierre Valette-Florence (2012). Marketplace Lifestyles in an Age of Social Media. New York: M.E. Sharpe, Inc. ISBN 978-0-7656-2561-8.
  5. ^ Elizabeth A. Minton, Lynn R. Kahle (2014). Belief Systems, Religion, and Behavioral Economics. New York: Business Expert Press LLC. ISBN 978-1-60649-704-3.
  6. ^ Sherman, Jeffrey W.; Klein, Samuel A. W. (2021). "The Four Deadly Sins of Implicit Attitude Research". Frontiers in Psychology. 11: 604340. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2020.604340. ISSN 1664-1078. PMC 7849589. PMID 33536976.
  7. ^ Wood, W. (2000). "Attitude Change: Persuasion and Social Influence". Annual Review of Psychology. 51: 539–570. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.51.1.539. PMID 10751980. S2CID 4944989.
  8. ^ Marcinkowski, Tom; Reid, Alan (2019-04-03). "Reviews of research on the attitude–behavior relationship and their implications for future environmental education research". Environmental Education Research. 25 (4): 459–471. doi:10.1080/13504622.2019.1634237. ISSN 1350-4622. S2CID 198645699.
  9. ^ Stangor, Charles; Jhangiani, Rajiv; Tarry, Hammond (2022-01-26). "Exploring Attitudes". Principles of Social Psychology (1st International H5P ed.). BCcampus. Archived from the original on 2022-06-29. Retrieved 2022-06-29.
  10. ^ a b Leandre, Joshua; Fabringar, Guyer (February 2015). "The attitude-behavior link: A review of the history". International Encyclopedia of Social Behavioral Sciences: 908–913 – via Research Gate.
  11. ^ "APA Dictionary of Psychology". Archived from the original on 2018-04-27. Retrieved 2022-07-25.
  12. ^ Eagly, Alice H., and Shelly Chaiken. 1998. "Attitude, Structure and Function." In Handbook of Social Psychology, ed. D.T. Gilbert, Susan T. Fisk, and G. Lindsey, 269–322. New York: McGowan-Hill.
  13. ^ Ajzen, Icek (2001). "Nature and Operation of Attitudes". Annual Review of Psychology. 52: 27–58. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.52.1.27. PMID 11148298. S2CID 15064083.
  14. ^ a b Vogel, T., Bohner, G., & Wanke, M. (2014). Attitudes and attitude change. Psychology Press.
  15. ^ a b c Main, R. (2004). The rupture of time: Synchronicity and Jung's critique of modern western culture. Routledge.
  16. ^ "Function-Attitudes". Archived from the original on 2021-11-20. Retrieved 2021-11-20.
  17. ^ "Function-Attitudes". Archived from the original on 2022-08-16. Retrieved 2022-11-20.
  18. ^ "Introvert vs. Extrovert: What's The Difference?". Cleveland Clinic. 2022-07-27. Archived from the original on 2022-11-20. Retrieved 2022-11-20.
  19. ^ Maio & Olson, 1998[full citation needed]
  20. ^ a b "Factors Influencing Attitude". 2017-09-20. Archived from the original on 2022-07-23. Retrieved 2022-07-25.
  21. ^ "Introvert vs. Extrovert: What's The Difference?". Cleveland Clinic. 2022-07-27. Archived from the original on 2022-11-20. Retrieved 2022-11-20.
  22. ^ a b Fishbein & Ajzen, 1975[full citation needed]
  23. ^ "Here's How Many Americans Believe Vaccines Are Unsafe". Time. Archived from the original on 5 March 2018. Retrieved 8 May 2018.
  24. ^ Dixon, Graham; Mckeever, Brooke; Holton, Avery; Clarke, Chris; Eosco, Gina (9 May 2015). "The Power of a Picture: Overcoming Scientific Misinformation by Communicating Weight-of-Evidence Information with Visual Exemplars: The Power of a Picture". Journal of Communication. 65 (4): 639–659. doi:10.1111/jcom.12159. Archived from the original on 5 February 2018. Retrieved 8 May 2018.
  25. ^ M. J. Rosenberg and C. I. Hovland, "Cognitive, Affective and Behavioral Components of Attitudes." In M. J. Rosenberg, C. I. Hovland (eds.), Attitude Organization and Change: An Analysis of Consistency Among Attitude Components. New Haven: Yale University Press (1960).
  26. ^ Eagly, Alice H., and Shelly Chaiken. 1998. "Attitude Structure and Function." In Handbook of Social Psychology, ed. D.T. Gilbert, Susan T. Fiske, and G. Lindzey, 269–322. New York: McGraw-Hill.
  27. ^ Fazio, Russell H., and Michael A. Olson (2003). Attitudes: Foundations, Functions, and Consequences. The Sage Handbook of Social Psychology. London: Sage.
  28. ^ Maio, Gregory R.; Haddock, Geoffrey (2009). The Psychology of Attitudes and Attitude Change. SAGE Publications. ISBN 978-1-4129-2975-2. Archived from the original on 2023-04-18. Retrieved 2022-08-04.
  29. ^ Wood, Wendy (2000). "Attitude Change: Persuasion and Social Influence". Annual Review of Psychology. Annual Reviews. 51 (1): 539–570. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.51.1.539. ISSN 0066-4308. PMID 10751980. S2CID 4944989. Archived from the original on 2016-02-15. Retrieved 2014-11-07.
  30. ^ Pratkanis, Anthony R; Breckler, Steven J; Greenwald, Anthony G (2014-03-18). Exploring the Latent Structure of Strength-Related Attitude Attributes. pp. 1–67. ISBN 9781317766582. ((cite book)): |journal= ignored (help)
  31. ^ Tang, T. L. P.; Liu, H. (2012). "Love of money and unethical behavior intention: Does an authentic supervisor's personal integrity and character (ASPIRE) make a difference?". Journal of Business Ethics. 107 (3): 295–312. doi:10.1007/s10551-011-1040-5. S2CID 144485045.
  32. ^ Tang, T. L. P.; Sutarso, T. (2013). "Falling or not falling into temptation? Multiple faces of temptation, monetary intelligence, and unethical intentions across gender". Journal of Business Ethics. 116 (3): 529–552. doi:10.1007/s10551-012-1475-3. S2CID 144216507.
  33. ^ Tang, T. L. P.; Tang, T. L. N. (2010). "Finding the lost sheep: A panel study of business students' intrinsic religiosity, Machiavellianism, and unethical behavior intention in a public institution". Ethics & Behavior. 20 (5): 352–379. doi:10.1080/10508422.2010.491763. S2CID 143806494.
  34. ^ Chen, J. Q.; Tang, T. L. P.; Tang, N. Y. (2013). "Temptation, monetary intelligence (love of money), and environmental context on unethical intentions and cheating". Journal of Business Ethics. 123 (2): 197–219. doi:10.1007/s10551-013-1783-2. S2CID 144634113.
  35. ^ Fabrigar, Leandre R.; MacDonald, Tara K.; Wegener, Duane T. (2005-04-01). The Structure of Attitudes. Routledge Handbooks Online. doi:10.4324/9781410612823. ISBN 978-0-8058-4492-4. Archived from the original on 2022-11-20. Retrieved 2022-11-20.
  36. ^ Breckler, SJ (1984). "Empirical validation of affect, behavior, and cognition as distinct components of attitude". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 47 (6): 1191–1205. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.47.6.1191. PMID 6527214.
  37. ^ Ajzen, Icek; Fishbein, Martin; Lohmann, Sophie; Albarracín, Dolores (2018), "The Influence of Attitudes on Behavior", The Handbook of Attitudes, Volume 1: Basic Principles, doi:10.4324/9781315178103, ISBN 9781315178103, S2CID 186905786, archived from the original on 2022-11-20, retrieved 2022-11-20
  38. ^ Ellithorpe, Morgan (September 2020). "MODE Model". Michigan State University – via Research Gate.
  39. ^ Berger, Ida E.; Mitchell, Andrew A. (December 1989). "The Effect of Advertising on Attitude Accessibility, Attitude Confidence, and the Attitude-Behavior Relationship". Journal of Consumer Research. 16 (3): 269. doi:10.1086/209213. ISSN 0093-5301. Archived from the original on 2022-03-22. Retrieved 2022-04-17.
  40. ^ "Implicit vs. Explicit Attitudes: Definition, Examples & Pros/Cons - Video & Lesson Transcript -". Archived from the original on 20 February 2015. Retrieved 8 May 2018.
  41. ^ Muschalik, Carolin; Elfeddali, Iman; Candel, Math J. J. M.; de Vries, Hein (2018-04-25). "A longitudinal study on how implicit attitudes and explicit cognitions synergistically influence physical activity intention and behavior". BMC Psychology. 6 (1): 18. doi:10.1186/s40359-018-0229-0. ISSN 2050-7283. PMC 5921561. PMID 29699574.
  42. ^ DeDreu, 2003[full citation needed]
  43. ^ Eagly, Alice H., and Shelly Chaiken. 1998. "Attitude Structure and Function." In Handbook of Social Psychology, ed. D.T. Gilbert, Susan T. Fiske, and G. Lindzey, 269–322. New York: McGraw-Hill.
  44. ^ Katz, Daniel (1960). "The Functional Approach to the Study of Attitudes". Public Opinion Quarterly. 24 (2): 163. doi:10.1086/266945.
  45. ^ Lapinski, Maria Knight; Boster, Franklin J. (2001). "Modeling the Ego-Defensive Function of Attitudes". Communication Monographs. 68 (3): 314–324. doi:10.1080/03637750128062. S2CID 42148945.
  46. ^ a b Fabrigar, Leandre R.; Petty, Richard E.; Smith, Steven M.; Crites, Stephen L. (2006). "Understanding knowledge effects on attitude-behavior consistency: The role of relevance, complexity, and amount of knowledge". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 90 (4): 556–577. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.90.4.556. ISSN 1939-1315. PMID 16649855.
  47. ^ Doob, Leonard W. (1947). "The behavior of attitudes". Psychological Review. American Psychological Association. 54 (3): 135–156. doi:10.1037/h0058371. ISSN 1939-1471. PMID 20240010.
  48. ^ Zajonc, Robert B. (1968). "Attitudinal effects of mere exposure". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 9 (2, Pt.2): 1–27. CiteSeerX doi:10.1037/h0025848.
  49. ^ Tesser, Abraham (1993). "The importance of heritability in psychological research: The case of attitudes". Psychological Review. American Psychological Association. 100 (1): 129–142. doi:10.1037/0033-295x.100.1.129. ISSN 1939-1471. PMID 8426878.
  50. ^ Brandt, M. J.; Wetherell, G. A. (2012). "What attitudes are moral attitudes? the case of attitude heritability". Social Psychological and Personality Science. 3 (2): 172–179. doi:10.1177/1948550611412793. S2CID 144521875.
  51. ^ Brink, T.L. (2008). "Unit 13: Social Psychology" (PDF). Psychology: A Student Friendly Approach. p. 295. Archived (PDF) from the original on 2012-03-26. Retrieved 2012-03-25.
  52. ^ Carlson, for most (2010). Psychology: the Science of Behaviour. New Jersey, USA: Pearson Education. pp. 488. ISBN 978-0-205-64524-4.
  53. ^ Rhodes & Woods, 1992[full citation needed]
  54. ^ Hovland, Carl I.; Weiss, Walter (1951). "The Influence of Source Credibility on Communication Effectiveness". Public Opinion Quarterly. Oxford University Press (OUP). 15 (4): 635–650. doi:10.1086/266350. ISSN 0033-362X.
  55. ^ Petty, R.E.; Cacioppo, J.T. (1984). "The effects of involvement on responses to argument quantity and quality: Central and peripheral routes to persuasion". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 46: 69–81. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.46.1.69.
  56. ^ a b Petrocelli, John V.; Tormala, Zakary L.; Rucker, Derek D. (January 2007). "Unpacking attitude certainty: Attitude clarity and attitude correctness". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 92 (1): 30–41. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.92.1.30. ISSN 1939-1315. PMID 17201540. S2CID 29399590.
  57. ^ a b Dillard, James Price (1994). "Rethinking the Study of Fear Appeals: An Emotional Perspective". Communication Theory. Oxford University Press (OUP). 4 (4): 295–323. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2885.1994.tb00094.x. ISSN 1050-3293.
  58. ^ a b Ajzen I, Fishbein M. 1980. Understanding Attitudes and Predicting Social Behaviour. Englewood-Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall
  59. ^ Ajzen, I (1991). "The theory of planned behaviour". Organization Behaviour and Human Decision Process. 50 (2): 179–211. doi:10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-t. S2CID 260959149.
  60. ^ Ajzen, 1980[full citation needed]
  61. ^ Hale, Householder & Greene, 2003, p. 259[full citation needed]
  62. ^ Icek Ajzen. (1985). "From intentions to actions: A theory of planned behavior."
  63. ^ Madden, T. J.; et al. (1992). "A comparison of the theory of planned behavior and the theory of reasoned action". Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. 18 (1): 3–9. doi:10.1177/0146167292181001. S2CID 145250802.
  64. ^ Chaiken, Shelly (1999). Dual-process Theories in Social Psychology. New York: Guilford Press. pp. 104–110.
  65. ^ Krosnick, J. A., Judd, C. M., & Wittenbrink, B. (2005). Measurement of Attitudes.pdf The measurement of attitudes. In D. Albarracín, B. T. Johnson, & M. P. Zanna (Eds.), The handbook of attitudes (pp. 21–76). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  66. ^ Olson, James M.; Zanna, Mark P. (1993). "Attitudes and Attitude Change". Annual Review of Psychology. 44: 117–54. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.44.1.117.
  67. ^ Buhrmester, Michael D.; Blanton, Hart; William, B. Swann Jr (2011). "Implicit self-esteem: nature, measurement, and a new way forward". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 100 (2): 365–385. doi:10.1037/a0021341. PMID 21038971. S2CID 12654510.
  68. ^ Whitley, B. E. (2010). The Psychology of Prejudice & Discrimination. United States: Wadsworth Engage Learning.
  69. ^ Fazio, Russell H.; Olson, Michael A. (2003). "Implicit Measures in Social Cognition Research: Their Meaning and Use" (PDF). Annual Review of Psychology. Annual Reviews. 54 (1): 297–327. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.54.101601.145225. ISSN 0066-4308. PMID 12172003. S2CID 8797951. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2014-03-23. Retrieved 2012-04-19.
  70. ^ Sekaquaptewa, D., Espinoza, P., Thompson, M., Vargas, P., & von Hippel, W. (2003). Stereotypic explanatory bias: Implicit stereotyping as a predictor of discrimination. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 39, 75-82

Further reading