This essay will examine the strength of the link between attitudes and behaviour and show that attitudes do not always predict behaviour as there are a number of variables that need to be put in place before the evaluation of a person behaving according to their attitudes can be assessed. These variables will be discussed in some detail. The three component model will be discussed and also attitude formation will be touched upon, before the link between behaviour and attitude can be examined a general understanding of how and why attitudes are formed needs to be addressed.
The word attitude is generally a term used to describe the way we perceive and evaluate the social world around us, the way in which we build a positive or negative opinion towards something or someone (Crisp and Turner 2007). Most social psychologists believe attitudes are not innate and that they are learned (Baron and Byrne 2004). However there is some evidence that suggests genetics factors may have a small influence over attitudes. This can be seen in studies involving identical and non identical twins, whereby identical twins share stronger attitude beliefs than non- identical twins (Baron and Byrne 2004). However this link does not mean that our genes determine our attitudes it just shows that the relationship between genes and personality can have an effect on our attitudes (Aronson,Wilson and Akert 2005).
Attitudes can be formed in a number of different ways. The three component model consists of Affective, Cognitive and behavioural based attitude experiences and has been a main area of focus among social psychologists. These three components are held within most attitudes, however not all attitudes are equal and different experiences can change the ...
... middle of paper ...
...ncy is sometimes low because people choose behaviour from their attitudes and their Subjective norms about the way they are meant to act or what they think is socially acceptable.
Works Cited
Aronson,E.Wilson,T and Akert,M (2005) Social Psychology. 5ed. New Jersey: Pearson Education LTD
Baron,R and Byrne,D (2004) Social Psychology.10ed .USA:Pearson Education LTD
Coolican,H(1999)Research methods and statistics in psychology.3ed.London: Hodder and Stoughton
Crisp,R and Turner,R (2007) Essential Social Psychology.London:Sage Publishing
Hogg,M and Cooper,J (2003)The SAGE Handbook of Social Psychology. London:Sage Publishing
Lord,C (1997) Social Psychology. USA:Harcourt Brace College Publishers
Eiser,J and Van der Plight,J (1988) Attitudes and Decisions: New essential Psychology:.Channel Islands:The Guernsey Press Co
Hogg, M.A., Abrams, D., & Martin, G.N. (2010). Social Cognition and Attitudes. In Martin, G.N., Carlson, N.R., Buskist W., (Ed.), Psychology (pp 646-677). Harlow: Pearson Education Limited.
It has been argued that SCM fail to meet the criteria set for a good theory (Ogden, 2003). Furthermore, Sniehotta (2014) has suggested that one of the most influential theories of SCM, the theory of planned behaviour (TPB); is no longer a plausible theory of behaviour or behaviour change and should be retired. This literature critique will cast a critical eye on the TPB and the surrounding literature. Firstly, it will begin with a discussion of the conceptual basis of the TPB and its determinants of behaviour and behaviour change. Secondly, it will critically examine the empirical evidence and outline the limitations and criticisms of the model. Furthermore, it will address the current research and applications of behaviour change within a socio-political context. Finally, it will propose ways that research within the area of predicting and
Today, many scientists accept that behavior and personality are determined by both nature and nurture. However, there is still the debate about the extent that biology or environment has to do with shaping a person. Nativists think that genes play the greatest role on what causes human’s to act certain ways, while empiricists believe the human mind is born free and is filled with likes, dislikes, and goals based on their environment. Overall, people are born with likelihood to act a certain way and have a predestined fate due to the way they grew up. They may be genetically predisposition to like certain things, but are still capable of changing based on outside influences. These thoughts are all part of the Naturalistic belief that nothing
A layman would define personality as an individual’s characteristics in terms of how they think and behave. Many theorists, however, interprets personality differently resulting in various personality theories. Personality is determined by traits which are behaviours displayed by a person in most given situations. How a person reacts to common circumstances may also be used to foresee future behaviours. Traits are then categorized into types that allow easier comparisons to be made between each individual’s attributes. The focus of this paper would be on the biological aspects of personality whereby traits are thought to be inheritable through genetics and associated with the central nervous system. Behavioural genetics are research that makes use of results from studies done on family, twins and adoptions. The findings of how both genes and environment influences personality from the studies will be discussed. Some researchers found possible issues with the representativeness of such studies. The outline of Eysenck’s biological model of personality and arousal, Gray’s BAS/BIS theory and Cloninger’s biological model of personality will further explain the biological effect on personality.
From the family customs to common societal perceptions about groups of people, it is safe to say that our thoughts, implicit or explicit, and behavior can be shaped according to other people’s views and morals. Upon taking the Implicit Association Test, I understood there is space to the individual thought, through positive or negative cultural or social influence.
The research examines social and psychological factors (Meyer, K. C., & Bouchey, H. A., 2010) empow...
Musher-Eizenman, D. R., Holub, S. C., & Arnett, M. (2003). Attitude and Peer Influences on
This working definition explicitly allows for changes in attitudes over time while acknowledging that certain attitudes have a relatively stable basis in a person’s memory system” (2014). This conceptual definition of attitudes and attitude change is that though attitudes can change based on new information or a different emotional reaction, they can also stay the same or relatively similar to their primary state. Overall, the information that individuals perceive through emotions can influence their attitudes, which can then alter their attitudes towards certain stimuli.
With the Social Judgement Theory; we take messages we hear and place them on an attitude scale in our mind. Our reading used the example of a man’s fear of flying and how someone might try to alleviate that fear. I personally know where this man is coming from; as I prefer not to fly unless it is necessary. This fear comes from seeing a plane crash personally and having to deal with the aftermath as a first responder. This theory goes into more detail of the message received by looking at how much does the person care and judging the message for content to decide if there should be a change or not.
Nowak, A., Szamrej, J., & Latané, B. (1990). From private attitude to public opinion: A dynamic theory of social impact. Psychological Review, 97(3), 362.
Attitudes are relatively stable positive, negative or neutral person's evaluations that can vary in level of intensity, and has an affective, cognitive, and behavioral component, (Piotrowski, 2005). The main difference between attitudes and a trait is variability. To consider an element as a trait, there should be considered two elements: longitudinal stability and consistency across situations.
According to Haddock & Maio (2004), “The Attitude conception has long formed an essential paradigm in social psychology”. Asch (1940) argued that the main route “in influence is not change in attitudes toward an individual but rather change in the definition and meaning of the individual” (Wood, 2000). Many people have the same feeling when it comes to questions related to the death penalty, prayer in schools, violence on television regulation, and political issues.
The aim of this essay is to analyse four theoretical approaches to psychology, including psychodynamic, humanistic, cognitive and behavioural. Analysing each approach in detail and identifying key features the approach uses to explain human behaviour. This essay will also analyse how successful each approach is in it methods, evidence gathering techniques and analyse how it can be applied to giving reasons for particular human behaviours. As well as analysing each approaches failings in it theories, methods and evidence gathering techniques.
The Biological approach to personality places emphasis on the genetic influences related to the development of an individual’s personality. Some may believe that children and their parents can have very similar personalities, for example a young boy having his father’s anger (Stelmack, 1990). Though this approach has often been questioned by psychologists, it is not disregarded all together. Some believe that genetics do have a role in an individual’s personality development; however environments, as well as personal experiences all work in forming personality.
On a daily basis, people are being influenced by the people around them, whether it is directly or indirectly. A person’s thoughts, feelings and actions can influence and be influenced by society. These social interactions provide enough opportunity for the presence of people to influence and change behavior, views, and attitudes of an individual. There are several forms of social influences, such as conformity, which I will be discussing. Why we conform has been a topic of considerable interest to social psychologists in particular such as he classic and well-known studies of Muzafer Sherif and Solomon Asch. In addition to researching why we conform, there’s also the question of whether conformity is good or bad.