6.8 KiB
| title | chunk | source | category | tags | date_saved | instance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Attitude-behavior consistency | 1/3 | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attitude-behavior_consistency | reference | science, encyclopedia | 2026-05-05T15:59:03.645594+00:00 | kb-cron |
Attitude-behaviour consistency is a central concept in social psychology, referring to the relationship and alignment between an individual's beliefs, or attitudes, and their actions, or behaviour. Specifically, the concept attitude-behaviour consistency addresses the parts of the study of attitudes in which social psychologists examine whether people's actions can be understood as arising from their beliefs and opinions. The relationship has been highly debated among researchers, given the fact that individuals often act in ways that seem inconsistent with their attitudes. Many argue that attitudes are not the only factors influencing behaviour; some people may behave more in line with their attitudes than others, and people's behaviour may align more with their attitudes in some circumstances than in others. The consistency between attitudes and behaviours can be explained by moderating factors, which strengthen or weaken the relationship. Some of the categories of moderators include attitude strength and accessibility, individual factors, and situational/contextual factors.
== Attitudes-Behaviour Models == An attitude is a psychological construct ranging from positive to negative that reflects an individual's evaluation of an object, person or issue. These evaluations are shaped by affects, behaviours, and cognition. Affects are emotional responses, behaviours are intentions or tendencies to act and cognition includes beliefs about the object that is being evaluated (attitude object). These components interact to create a coherent, though not always consistent, attitude toward an object. Even in this regard there is still variability as the impact of each component can vary from person to person. While some attitudes are more influenced by emotions others may be more impacted by behaviours and beliefs. A meta analysis conducted by Stephan Kraus in 1995 found that attitudes influence behaviours when attitudes are stable, more accessible, and there is direct experience with the attitude object. Attitudes are more likely to predict behaviours when the attitude is strong and accessible, the influence of social influences is minimal and the attitude aligns with the specific behavior. However when there are external pressures or conflicting priorities attitudes may fail to predict behaviours.
=== Theory of Planned Behaviour ===
The Theory of Planned Behaviour, developed by Martin Fishbein and Izek Ajzen, suggests that people act rationally and their behaviours are influenced by intentions. There are three key variables that jointly predict our intentions:
The attitude toward the behaviour Subjective norms Perceived behavioural control ( a person's belief in their ability to perform a behavior) The likelihood of the intention to perform the behaviour and the behaviour itself increases as the three factors become more favourable.
== Consistency Theories ==
=== Balance Theory === Balance Theory was first developed by Heider with Gestalt influences. Gestalt psychology posits that there is a tendency towards perceptual simplicity, such as symmetry and continuation. Heider extends this principle to social relations, where there are balanced and imbalanced states. When applied to attitudes, it is defined in triadic relation between three elements: a Person (P), an Other person (O), and an Attitude Object (X). Attitude is the relation between two elements, defined as either positive or negative, resulting in 8 distinct triads. If the number of positive relations is odd, the triad is balanced; vice versa.
=== Congruity Theory === Proposed by Osgood and Tannebaum, the principle of congruity claims that attitude change always results in increased congruity for the individual. Compared to balance theory, congruity theory allows for gradations of relation between elements and introduces a formula to quantitatively predict attitude change. There are five variables in the formula: point of resolution for object (RO), point of resolution for source (RS), prior attitude toward object (AO), prior attitude toward source (AS), and direction of assertion (d; no gradation). The frame of reference is the individual; the source is the other communicator; and the assertion indicates the source's attitude.
=== Dissonance Theory === The Cognitive Dissonance Theory proposed by Leon Festinger, suggests that cognitive discomfort (dissonance) occurs when an individual's behaviour and beliefs do not align. In his famous work A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance, he suggests that the existence of cognitive dissonance automatically leads to pressures to reduce it. The three main ways in which we reduce this postdecision dissonance are 1) changing or revoking the decision, 2) changing cognition about the alternatives, and 3) establishing cognitive overlap. Changing or revoking the decision occurs immediately after a decision, when the dissonance is not overwhelming as the choice was likely to have been the most favourable at the moment. The discomfort of slight dissonance may tempt undoing the decision, but Leon Festinger points out that simply reversing the decision does not reduce dissonance–as what should be reversed to properly reduce dissonance is the cognitive elements that were involved in the decision making, not the mere decision itself. Alternatively, individuals may psychologically revoke the decision by denying responsibility, attributing the decision to external forces. For example, someone who regrets accepting a particular job offer may convince themselves that they had no real choice in it and that they had to accept it. The more common way individuals attempt to reduce postdecision dissonance is by altering one's perception of the alternative decision. By reframing or reducing the positive elements of the rejected option, and the negative elements in the chosen one, one can increase cognitive consonance and lessen discomfort. This approach is not always effective as for if contradictory evidence emerges, dissonance may persist despite cognitive efforts to justify the decision. Lastly, creating cognitive overlap occurs when individuals find or invent similarities between the chosen and unchosen alternatives; when alternatives share common elements, dissonance decreases partly because the decision feels less like a loss. In practice, this may look like reframing all the options, including the chosen and rejected, as all serving towards the same end (e.g., a child choosing between a ball game and a circus may come to realise that both serve the purpose of entertainment making the decision less conflicting). Another method is to identify the directly overlapping aspects (e.g., "the circus will also have ball games for me to play!").