Advertisement

Dimensional Salience, Judgment, and Attitudes

Chapter
Part of the Springer Series in Social Psychology book series (SSSOC)

Abstract

The manner in which people form judgments and evaluations has been the subject of much research interest in recent years. This research has identified several judgmental heuristics that function as adaptive strategies of selective effort. One picture that emerges is that of the “cognitive miser” (Taylor, 1981) who selectively processes a subset of the information available in order to structure his or her social environment. If our perceptual and decision processes are not to be overwhelmed by the mass of information available to us, we need to be guided by considerations of cognitive economy.

Keywords

Nuclear Energy Belief Statement Attitude Group Salient Dimension Applied Social Psychology 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1977). Attitude-behavior relations: A theoretical analysis and review of empirical research. Psychological Bulletin, 84, 888–918.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1980). Understanding attitudes and predicting social behavior. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  3. Anderson, N. H. (1974). Information integration: A brief survey. In D. H. Krantz, R. C. Atkinson, R. D. Luce, & P. Suppes (Eds.), Contemporary developments in mathematical psychology (Vol. 2). San Francisco: Freeman.Google Scholar
  4. Asch, S. E. (1946). Forming impressions of personality. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 41, 258–290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Cialdini, R. B., Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1981). Attitude and attitude change. Annual Review of Psychology, 32, 357–404.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cohen, R. (1971). An investigation of the diagnostic processing of contradictory information. European Journal of Social Psychology, 1, 475–492.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Eagly, A. H., & Himmelfarb, S. (1978). Attitudes and opinions. Annual Review of Psychology, 29, 517–554.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Edwards, A. L. (1959). Social desirability and the description of others. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 59, 434–436.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Edwards, W. (1954). The theory of decision-making. Psychological Bulletin, 51, 380–417.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Eiser, J. R., & Bhavnani, K. K. (1974). The effect of situational meaning on the behavior of subjects in the Prisoner’s Dilemma Game. European Journal of Social Psychology, 4, 93–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Eiser, J. R., Eiser, C., Patterson, D. J., & Harding, C. M. (1983). Effects of selective nutritional information on evaluative judgements of common foods: Attitude change through manipulated salience. Manuscript submitted for publication.Google Scholar
  12. Eiser, J. R., & Mower White, C. J. (1974a). Evaluative consistency and social judgment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 30, 349–359.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Eiser, J. R., & Mower White, C. J. (1974b). The persuasiveness of labels: Attitude change produced through definition of the attitude continuum. European Journal of Social Psychology, 4, 89–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Eiser, J. R., & Pancer, S. M. (1979). Attitudinal effects of the use of evaluatively-biased language. European Journal of Social Psychology, 9, 39–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Eiser, J. R., & van der Pligt, J. (1979). Beliefs and values in the nuclear debate. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 9, 524–536.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Eiser, J. R., van der Pligt, J., & Friend, P. (1983). Adolescents’ arguments for and against smoking. Journal of the Institute of Health Education, 21, 73–78.Google Scholar
  17. Eiser, J. R., van der Pligt, J., & Gossop, M. R. (1979). Categorization, attitude and memory for the source of attitude statements. European Journal of Social Psychology, 9, 243–251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Eiser, J. R., & Ross, M. (1977). Partisan language, immediacy and attitude change. European Journal of Social Psychology, 7, 477–489.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Feather, N. T. (1959). Subjective probability and decision under uncertainty. Psychological Review, 66, 150–164.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Fischhoff, B., Goitein, B., & Shapira, Z. (1982). The experienced utility of expected utility approaches. In N. T. Feather (Ed.), Expectations and actions: Expectancy-value models in psychology. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  21. Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention and behavior. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
  22. Fishbein, M., & Coombs, F. S. (1974). Basis for decision: An attitudinal analysis of voting behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology, 4, 95–124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Fiske, S. T. (1980). Attention and weight in person perception: The impact of negative and extreme behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 38, 889–906.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Fiske, S. T. (1981). Social cognition and affect. In J. H. Harvey (Ed.), Cognition, social behavior, and the environment. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  25. Goldberg, L. R. (1978). Differential attribution of trait-descriptive terms to oneself as compared to well-liked, neutral and disliked others: A psychometric analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 36, 1012–1028.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Heider, F. (1958). The psychology of interpersonal relations. New York: Wiley.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Higgins, E. T., Herman, C. P., & Zanna, M. P. (1981). Social cognition: The Ontario Symposium (Vol. 1). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  28. Hodges, B. H. (1974). Effects of valence on relative weighting in impression formation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 30, 378–381.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Jaccard, J. A., & Davidson, A. R. (1972). Toward an understanding of family planning behaviors: An initial investigation. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 2, 228–235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Judd, C. M., & Johnson, J. T. (1981). Attitudes, polarisation and diagnosticity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 41, 26–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Lichtenstein, S., Fischhoff, B., & Phillips, L. D. (1977). Calibration of probabilities: The state of the art. In H. Jungermann & G. de Zeeuw (Eds.), Decision-making and change in human affairs. Dordrecht: D. Reidel.Google Scholar
  32. McArthur, L. Z., & Post, D. L. (1977). Figural emphasis and person perception. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 13, 520–535.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. McKennell, A. C., & Thomas, R. K. (1967). Adults’ and adolescents’ smoking habits and attitudes. Government Social Survey, SS 353/B. London: HMSO.Google Scholar
  34. Miller, G. A. (1956). The magical number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psychological Review, 63, 81–97.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Nisbett, R. E., & Ross, L. D. (1980). Human inference: Strategies and shortcomings of human judgment. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  36. Osgood, C. E., & Tannenbaum, P. H. (1955). The principle of congruity in the prediction of attitude change. Psychological Review, 62, 42–55.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Otway, H. J., Maurer, D., & Thomas, K. (1978). Nuclear power: The question of public acceptance. Futures, 10, 109–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Pruitt, D. G. (1967). Reward structure and cooperation: The decomposed Prisoner’s Dilemma game. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 7, 21–27.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Rosenberg, J. (1956). Cognitive structure and attitudinal affect. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 53, 367–372.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Simon, H. A. (1957). Models of man. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  41. Slovic, P. (1974). Hypothesis testing in the learning of positive and negative linear functions. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 11, 368–376.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Smetana, J. G., & Adler, N. E. (1980). Fishbein’s value and expectancy model: An examination of some assumptions. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 6, 89–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Smith, J. L. (1982). A structuralist interpretation of the Fishbeinian Model of Intention. Journal Theory of Social Behaviour, 12, 29–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Suchman, E. A. (1950). The intensity component in attitude and opinion research. In S. A. Stouffer, L. Guttman, E. A. Suchman, P. F. Lazersfield, S. A. Starr, & J. A. Clausen (Eds.), Studies in social psychology in World War II: Vol. 4. Measurement and prediction. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  45. Sundstrom, E., DeVault, R., & Peele, E. (1981). Acceptance of a nuclear power plant: Applications of the expectancy-value model. In A. Baum & J. E. Singer (Eds.), Advances in environmental psychology (Vol. 3). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  46. Tajfel, H., & Wilkes, A. L. (1964). Salience of attributes and commitment to extreme judgments in the perception of people. British Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 3, 40–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Taylor, S. E. (1981). The interface of cognitive and social psychology. In J. Harvey (Ed.), Cognition, social behavior, and the environment. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  48. Taylor, S. E., & Fiske, S. T. (1975). Point-of-view and perceptions of causality. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 32, 439–445.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Taylor, S. E., & Fiske, S. T. (1978). Salience, attention, and attribution: Top of the head phenomena. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 11). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  50. Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1974). Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Science, 185, 1124–1131.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. van der Pligt, J. (1981). Actors’ and observers’ explanations: Divergent perspectives or divergent evaluations? In C. Antaki (Ed.), The psychology of ordinary explanations of social behaviour. London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  52. van der Pligt, J., & Eiser, J. R. (1980). Negativity and descriptive extremity in impression formation. European Journal of Social Psychology, 10, 415–419.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. van der Pligt, J., Ester, P., & van der Linden, J. van. (1983). Attitude extremity, consensus and diagnosticity. European Journal of Social Psychology, in press.Google Scholar
  54. van der Pligt, J., van der Linden, J., & Ester, P. (1982). Attitudes to nuclear energy: Beliefs, values and false consensus. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 2, 221–231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. van der Pligt, J., & van Dijk, J. A. (1979). Polarization of judgment and preference for judgmental labels. European Journal of Social Psychology, 9, 233–242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. van der Rijt, G. A. J. (1979). Jeugd en Antirookinformatie. Doctoral dissertation, Sociologisch Instituut, Katholieke Universiteit Nijmegen.Google Scholar
  57. Wertheimer, M. (1923). Untersuchungen zur Lehre von der Gestalt—II. Psychologische Forschung, 4, 301–350.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Woo, T. O., & Castore, C. H. (1980). Expectancy-value and selective exposure as determinants of attitudes toward a nuclear power plant. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 10, 224–234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Zajonc, R. B. (1980). Feeling and thinking: Preferences need no inferences. American Psychologist, 35, 151–175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag New York Inc. 1984

Authors and Affiliations

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations