Difficulty: Intermediate | Prerequisites: Chapters 1–3
This chapter tackles the relationship between what we think and what we do. It covers how attitudes are defined and measured, when they predict behaviour, and three major theories explaining why behaviour can change attitudes. The cognitive dissonance and self-perception frameworks are core exam material.
Attitudes have three components (affect, behaviour, cognition) and come in explicit and implicit forms. Attitudes predict behaviour best when they are specific, stable, and forged by experience. Behaviour also shapes attitudes, explained by three competing theories: self-presentation theory (we want to look consistent), cognitive dissonance theory (inconsistency creates discomfort we resolve by changing attitudes), and self-perception theory (we infer our attitudes from our behaviour, the same way we infer other people's).
Attitude
A favourable or unfavourable evaluative reaction toward something or someone, exhibited in one's beliefs, feelings, or intended behaviour.
Explicit attitudes
Attitudes you are aware of and can report. Operate through System 2 (controlled processing).
Implicit attitudes
Attitudes you do not immediately know you have or cannot articulate. Operate through System 1 (automatic processing).
In simple terms, explicit attitudes are what you say you believe; implicit attitudes are what your gut reveals.
Implicit Association Test (IAT)
A computer-driven assessment that uses reaction time to measure how quickly people associate concepts. Millions of IAT assessments show that implicit biases are pervasive, people differ in them, and people are often unaware of their own.
Cognitive dissonance
The uncomfortable psychological tension that arises when a person holds two inconsistent cognitions (e.g. "I believe smoking causes cancer" and "I still smoke"). Results in pressure to reduce the dissonance by adding, altering, or changing cognitions.
Self-presentation theory
For strategic reasons, we express attitudes that make us appear consistent with our behaviour. Motivated by impression management.
Self-perception theory
We know our own attitudes through the same process we use to infer others' attitudes: by observing behaviour. "If I chose this, I must like it."
Overjustification effect
The result of bribing people to do what they already like doing. When an extrinsic reason (pay) is added to an intrinsic reason (enjoyment), people may discount the intrinsic motivation and see their actions as externally controlled.
Think of it as: paying a child for reading may make them read less once the payment stops.
Intrinsic motivation
Doing something because it is enjoyable or interesting in itself.
Extrinsic motivation
Doing something for an external reward (money, grades, praise).
Affect: the emotional component (how you feel about something).
Behaviour: the action component (what you do or intend to do).
Cognition: the belief component (what you think about something).
Object: the target of the attitude.
Explicit attitudes are conscious and reportable (System 2). Measured through self-report (Likert scales, visual analogue scales) or by observing behaviour.
Implicit attitudes are unconscious or not easily articulated (System 1). Measured through incidental behaviour: mouse and eye tracking (movement), the IAT (response time), data mining (language), and physiology.
Explicit and implicit attitudes toward the same object can differ. They are related but operate through different systems.
The relationship can be understood at three levels: ontological (what they are), epistemological (how we know them), and operational (how they work).
Personal attitudes are not the only determinant of behaviour; the situation matters too.
Attitudes predict behaviour best when:
The attitude is potent and specific (a specific attitude predicts a specific behaviour better than a general attitude does).
The person is self-aware (the mirror study: people whose attention is directed to themselves show greater attitude-behaviour consistency).
The attitude is stable and forged by direct experience.
When people are assigned a specific role, it may feel artificial at first, but the role begins to fit over time.
Three theories explain why behaviour changes attitudes:
Self-presentation theory
For strategic reasons, we express attitudes that make us seem consistent with our behaviour.
Motivation: we care about what others think of us (impression management).
Evidence: people adjust attitude statements based on concern for what others will think.
Cognitive dissonance theory
Holding two inconsistent cognitions creates uncomfortable tension.
To reduce dissonance, people can: add cognitions, alter the importance of existing cognitions, or change cognitions.
Dissonance reduction follows the path of least resistance: past behaviour is impossible to change, perceptions of behaviour are hard to change, but attitudes are relatively easy to change. So attitudes shift to align with behaviour.
Cognitions exist in three possible relations: irrelevant (no connection), consonant (consistent), or dissonant (inconsistent).
Evidence: having attitudes and behaviours that disagree produces arousal, especially when they threaten feelings of self-worth.
Self-perception theory
We infer our own attitudes the same way we infer others': by observing behaviour.
"If I chose this, I must like it." "If I suffered to get this, it must have been worth it."
Intended as a competitor to cognitive dissonance theory, self-perception theory works best when attitudes are initially weak or ambiguous.
The overjustification effect is key evidence: when an extrinsic reward is added to an intrinsically motivated behaviour, the person may discount the intrinsic reason and see the behaviour as externally driven. Remove the reward and motivation drops.
The facial feedback effect also supports self-perception theory: adopting a facial expression can influence the corresponding emotion.
Students often think cognitive dissonance and self-perception theory explain the same phenomenon in the same way. Cognitive dissonance involves genuine discomfort that motivates attitude change. Self-perception theory involves a cooler, more rational process of inferring attitudes from behaviour. They apply in different circumstances: dissonance theory works best when the original attitude was strong; self-perception theory works best when it was weak.
Students sometimes assume that attitudes always predict behaviour. They do not. Situational pressures, social norms, and how specific the attitude is all matter.
The overjustification effect does not mean rewards are always bad. It applies specifically when a person already enjoys the activity and the reward makes them reinterpret their motivation as external.
⚠️ Know the three theories of why behaviour affects attitudes (self-presentation, cognitive dissonance, self-perception) and be able to compare them.
⚠️ Be able to explain cognitive dissonance with the smoking example: "I believe smoking causes cancer" + "I still smoke" = dissonance, resolved by changing one cognition.
⚠️ The overjustification effect is a favourite exam question. Know the mechanism and be able to give an example.
⚠️ Understand the conditions under which attitudes predict behaviour (specific, stable, self-aware, experience-based).
⚠️ Know the difference between explicit and implicit attitudes and how each is measured.
Fill in the blank: The three components of an attitude are ______, ______, and ______. (Affect, Behaviour, Cognition)
True or False: Implicit attitudes are measured through self-report questionnaires. (False. They are measured through indirect methods like the IAT.)
Fill in the blank: The uncomfortable tension from holding two inconsistent cognitions is called ______. (Cognitive dissonance)
True or False: Self-perception theory involves discomfort that motivates change. (False. That describes cognitive dissonance theory. Self-perception theory is a cooler inferential process.)
Fill in the blank: The ______ effect occurs when adding an external reward to an already enjoyable activity reduces intrinsic motivation. (Overjustification)
Q: A student who hates public speaking volunteers for a speech competition and afterwards reports enjoying it. Which theory best explains this shift?
A: Cognitive dissonance theory. The student held a strong negative attitude toward public speaking but freely chose to do it, creating dissonance. To reduce the discomfort, the student shifted their attitude to be more positive ("I must enjoy it if I volunteered").
Q: A child loves drawing. Her parents start paying her $5 for every drawing. After a few weeks the payments stop. She draws less than before the payments started. Explain why.
A: The overjustification effect. The external reward (money) led the child to reinterpret her motivation as extrinsic rather than intrinsic. Once the reward was removed, the perceived reason for drawing disappeared, and her motivation dropped below its original level.
Q: Compare self-presentation theory and cognitive dissonance theory. How do they differ in explaining why behaviour changes attitudes?
A: Self-presentation theory says we express attitudes that make us look consistent to others; the change is strategic and audience-driven. Cognitive dissonance theory says holding inconsistent cognitions produces genuine discomfort, and we change our attitudes internally to relieve that tension. The key difference is motivation: impression management vs. internal discomfort.
Cognitive dissonance links back to the self-concept material in Chapter 2: dissonance is most acute when behaviour threatens self-worth. The explicit/implicit attitude distinction mirrors the System 1/System 2 framework from Chapter 3. The overjustification effect connects to intrinsic motivation research in developmental and educational psychology. Self-presentation theory ties to the self-monitoring and self-handicapping concepts from Chapter 2.
Attitude, ABC model, affect, behaviour, cognition, explicit attitudes, implicit attitudes, Implicit Association Test, IAT, Likert scale, cognitive dissonance, Festinger, self-presentation theory, impression management, self-perception theory, Bem, overjustification effect, intrinsic motivation, extrinsic motivation, facial feedback effect, consonant, dissonant, irrelevant cognitions, attitude-behaviour consistency, mirror study, NYU social psychology, Chapter 4