Attribution Theory and

Theories of Belief Change

Attribution Theory

Deals with how people perceive the causes of behavior

Concerned with Causal Inferences Personal Causes vs. External Causes

– Ex. “I earned an A” vs. “My teacher gave me an F”

Also concerned with How people make these types of inferences

Kelley’s Attribution Model“Covariation Model”

Kelley suggests 3 Factors we use when making causal attributions:– Distinctiveness – whether a person’s behavior is

different across situations – Consistency – looking for trends in related situations

over time (light switch)– Consensus – comparing the person to how others

are behaving Our ability to infer causality correctly depends

on those three factors– movie theater audience member

Kelley’s Attribution Model Limitations in our ability to make correct attributions come

from: – Motivational Biases, Discounting/Augmenting Principles, and other

Biases 3 Motivational Biases:

– Self-serving bias – we alter our perceptions to protect our self-esteem/self-concept

• Accept responsibility for the good, assign blame for the bad: You are in charge of renting a movie

– False consensus bias – we mistakenly believe that others are like us

• “everyone does it”

– False uniqueness bias – we mistakenly perceive ourselves as different

• Snob Appeal

Kelley’s Attribution Model (cont’d) Discounting and Augmenting Principles

– Considers perceived motivations of the message source

– Perceived source intention is one of the most important variables in persuasion

Discounting and Augmenting Principles

Discounting Principle– The more possible causes there are for a behavior,

the weaker the perceived viability of any single cause

– For example: former President Bush saying we should vote for his son

Augmenting Principle– An unexpected position from a source perceived as

biased will strengthen the persuasive power of the message

– Bush saying, “after serious consideration, I think you should have voted for Gore”

Two other types of Bias

Knowledge Bias– Deals with the source’s previous background and

how this impacts their perspective– People’s expectations of the source’s position

(based on this bias) can be either confirmed or disconfirmed by the source’s behavior

• If I went to Catholic high school, but advocated the public education system

Audience Reporting Bias– Expectations can be confirmed or disconfirmed

based on the nature of the audience that the source is presenting the message to

• I speak to undergraduates about parking... Registrar?– How would I confirm? Disconfirm?

Related Conclusions w/respect to ads:– The believability of some product claims

increase by disclaiming: “a superiority on some, but not all” product features while admitting only average performance in other features

• Suggestion of throwing in one “weak” feature of a product to enhance overall credibility of the ad

• Consumers tend to discount testimonials that are completely positive

• WHY?

Self-Perception Theory (Bem, 1972) Sometimes people observe their own

behavior and then make inferences about their attitudes

If people don’t possess a strong attitude, or give an issue much thought, they may infer that they approve of the behavior after engaging in it

Internal and External attributions will also be used to explain their own behavior

For a different approach to Attributions of Behavior…

Weiner’s Attribution Model

Also interested in the perceived causes of actions and behaviors

Considers the following factors (internal/external):– Intention– Controllability– Stability– Locus of Control

Theory of Reasoned Action (TORA; Fishbein & Ajzen, 1981) Why study attitudes?

– To gain insights into how we can change them This Reasoned Action model is useful for

developing attitude change strategies because it focuses directly upon attributes that may be impacted by the source

The theory predicts behavior based on the attitude toward the behavior, and the pressure to behave in a certain way

TORA (cont’d)

Deals with behaviors that are voluntary Predicts the likelihood of behavior by

gauging behavioral intention

Intention is the step between attitude and behavior… intention determines the behavior

TORA (cont’d)

Accordingly, Behavioral Intention is influenced by two components:– Attitude toward the behavior (Ab)

– Subjective Norm (SN)

TORA Model

TORA: Algebraically Stated(all together now!)

B BI = w1Ab+w2SN

Behavior (B) is a function of () Behavioral Intention (BI), which is measured by adding Attitude toward the Behavior (Ab) to the Subjective Norm (SN)

w1 and w2 are weights determining the relative importance of each term

Attitude Component Attitude is a function of one’s salient beliefs about

the behavior Theory claims: Attitude toward buying the car is a

function of the strength by which one holds a salient belief and the evaluation of whether the consequence of that belief is positive/negative, etc.

AB = biei

Where i is each consequence, and n is the total number of beliefs

n

i=1

Change total number of beliefs to be considered by the consumer (add new information/stress different information)

Change the belief strength of receivers’ held beliefs (add new information)

Change the evaluations by which receivers rate the consequences of the beliefs (emphasize the downside/upside of the behavior)

Change the configuration of beliefs in order to make certain beliefs more salient (buying a PC)

Implications for persuasion and Attitudes (4)

Subjective Norm Component

Constitutes the individual’s beliefs that people who are important to him/her, think he/she should or should not perform the action in reference

SN=(NB)i(MC)I

NB = normative beliefs MC = motivation to comply M = number of referents (people)

M

i=1

Increase # of referent individuals, or salient others who advise the consumer or provide approval/disapproval of the behavior

Change the strength of the normative beliefs Change the motivation to comply component

(why comply? Be independent…) Change the configuration of supporters

(versus distractors) who impact on the consumer’s decision (they are just jealous)

Implications for persuasion and the Subjective Norm (4)

Example in Advertising

Source Characteristics

Source Credibility

Expertise (knowledge bias) Trustworthiness (audience reporting

bias) McCroskey: Authoritativeness and

character Berlo, Lemert and Mertz: safety factor

(trustworthiness), qualification factor (expertise), and dynamism

Expertise

Described as: “trained, experienced, skillful, informed, authoritative, able, and intelligent”

The audience expects an expert to present strong arguments—weak arguments can completely remove any influence of perceived expertise due to title, appearance, and qualifications

The more change that is desired, the more expertise should be emphasized

Expertise vs. Similarity Appeal

When should you opt for similarity?– Select Comfort Mattress; BlockBusters;

Paint Store Story Social comparison theory (natural social

comparisons exist given: age, gender, occupation, etc.)– Holding “correct” attitude as a function of

comparison group’s consensus• Becomes “social proof”

Expertise vs. Similarity Appeal (cont’d) Similarity is more likely to be effective when:

– Intent of attitude/behavior is to Satisfy personal need

– Similarity Is relevant to the topic– Used to Increase liking for the speaker– The right variables are examined (age, sex…)– Source refers to attitudes (not beliefs… why does

this make sense?)

Trustworthiness

As the topic becomes more personal, trust becomes more important

Speakers who speak against their own interest (augmenting principle)

Overheard messages (discounting principle)

Personal Characteristics

Composure: relaxed, comfortable and calm Dynamism: powerful, active, energetic,

outgoing Sociability: friendly, helpful, likeable

*Sometimes it is easiest to think about the ability of these qualities to persuade by imagining

someone who is deficient in them* Or use the book’s

Vincent the Waiter story (p. 135)

Physical Attractiveness Society emphasizes beauty Attractive individuals have more confidence, are

more optimistic, more fluent, and speak faster Studies show:

– Jury may be more lenient to attractive criminals• But not when they used their beauty to commit the crime

– Good looking men in organizations are perceived to have leadership skills, but this is not the case for women

What about expertise vs. physical attractiveness?

Celebrity Endorsements Only 20% of celebrity appeals work?

– Is the risk worth it? LeBron and his $90mil?– Companies want to know what circumstances will make it

work—therefore, you will want to know Things to know:

– Effective when the receiver identifies with the celebrity… • who is Alf trying to identify with?

– Children are more likely to be influenced by the “in” celebrities –

• Britney and Pepsi; Christina and Coke

– Match-Up Hypothesis: the public image of the celebrity and the message about the product

• Joe Namath and Arthritis

Opinion Leaders

Two-step flow: media affect opinion leaders who then affect individuals

Opinion Leaders– Tend to be better informed, talk to more

people, may have more formal education, are heavy media consumers

– Specific opinion leaders vary depending on the topic

Theoretical Bases of Power Informational Influence – very often leads to

belief/attitude/behavior change– Present new information, or new arguments (like with

Affirmative Action discussion) Referent Influence – Simply due to people wanting

to be associated with the source’s referent group– People can be influenced by the role model

• Explains successful celebrity endorsement

Expert Influence – Superior Power– Ex. Computer skills, mastery of the English lang, or

excellent musicians are perceived to be experts

Theoretical Bases of Power (cont’d) Legitimate Influence

– When people have a “right” to impact your behavior; as a boss, parent or teacher

• Key is the receiver’s belief that the source is legitimate

Reward and Coercive Influences– If an agent/source can control the rewards and

punishments the target/receiver receives, they can influence all of the above

Improving Communicator Effectiveness

Have low-credibility? Got milk? Be introduced after you speak/present your message

Learn to speak proficiently using appropriate verbal and nonverbal communication modes

Find common ground with the audience– Careful not to be obvious

Effectively use the media– Written messages produce more thoughts about the content

(why?)– Audio/Visual content produce more thoughts about the speaker

(why?)– Therefore… good looking, likable, credible speakers should do it

live

Next Class…

Predicting Group and Individual Responses!MORE INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES