Difficulty: Intermediate | Prerequisites: Weeks 1–5 notes (especially dual-process approach, System 1/2, self-concept, social identity theory basics)
Weeks 6 and 8 deal with how attitudes form, how they can be measured beneath conscious awareness, and how other people's beliefs and behaviours change our own. Week 6 introduces attitudes as evaluative dispositions sitting between beliefs and actions, then distinguishes explicit attitudes (conscious, System 2) from implicit attitudes (automatic, System 1) and the tools used to detect them. Week 8 covers social influence: conformity, social norms, social identity theory in depth, deindividuation, social roles, and the lessons of the Stanford and BBC prison experiments.
Attitudes are evaluative dispositions between beliefs and actions, shaped both by conscious reflection and by automatic associations we may not even know we hold. Social influence, whether through conformity or persuasion, changes our attitudes and behaviour by exploiting our need to be correct (informational influence) and our need to be accepted (normative influence). Group membership is not a weakness to overcome; it is an adaptive feature that shapes whose norms we follow and why.
Attitude
An evaluative intermediary disposition, functionally between beliefs and behaviours. Defined by at least two features: an attitude object (what it is about) and attitude valence (positive or negative). Optionally also attitude intensity (how strong it is).
A-B-C model
The three components of how an attitude is experienced: Affect (feels good or bad), Behaviour (tendency to approach or avoid), Cognition (relevant beliefs and judgements that come to mind).
Self-perception theory
When internal states are weak or ambiguous, we infer our attitudes by observing our own behaviour and its circumstances. This is how most entirely new attitudes form.
Balance theory
We form attitudes by extrapolating internal consistency with prior attitudes and beliefs. Especially relevant for second-hand information.
Cognitive dissonance
The uncomfortable tension we experience when made consciously aware of internal contradictions or inconsistencies. The main mechanism driving change in already-formed attitudes.
Social desirability
A form of impression management where participants avoid true responses they fear will lead to negative judgement. A major obstacle to accurate attitude measurement.
Explicit attitude
A consciously held, knowingly endorsed attitude passed through System 2.
Implicit attitude
An automatic, System 1 attitude-like reaction we may not be aware of. Shaped by environmental exposure, including media, gossip, prejudice and myth.
Implicit Association Test (IAT)
A sorting task under time pressure and accuracy demands that measures the strength of automatic associations between pairs of concepts. Most famous for demonstrating implicit racial bias. Created by Mahzarin Banaji and colleagues.
Social influence
Having one's judgements, opinions, attitudes or beliefs changed by exposure to those of others. Includes both intentional (persuasion) and unintentional (conformity) channels.
Compliance
Appearing to agree with others while privately dissenting.
Identification
Emulating or agreeing with a liked or respected other.
Internalisation
When a socially communicated standard, belief or behaviour becomes sincerely endorsed, both privately and publicly.
Conformity
Changing one's behaviour, beliefs or judgement patterns to align with the perceived normative standards of others.
Social norms
Stable, culturally transmitted standards of behaviour that become near-universal in particular contexts. Must be learnable through observation and inference, not just instruction. The most striking examples of purely intersubjective phenomena.
Informational influence
We take others' behaviour and beliefs as indicators of what is true, and internalise them out of a desire to be correct.
Normative influence
We assess others' expectations and comply with them out of a desire to please.
Social identity theory (Tajfel)
Frames social groups in terms of adaptive benefits they confer to members. Breaks group membership into three processes: social categorisation, social identification, social comparison.
Deindividuation
The temporary reduction in one's sense of self. Viewed negatively in the West; associated with corruption and moral degeneracy, but also with positive experiences (mindfulness, collective joy).
Social roles
Performative identities that provide scripts for behaviour and shape expectations. We switch between multiple social roles throughout the day.
Stanford Prison Experiment (SPE)
Zimbardo's study on the power of social roles to override individual character. Demonstrated that roles provide scripts, but criticised for being contrived, for under-emphasising role discontinuity, and for suggesting groups destroy agency.
BBC Prison Experiment (Haslam and Reicher)
A Social Identity Theory-based replication that predicted people would internalise group standards in proportion to perceived benefits of membership, rather than automatically conforming to stereotyped role norms.
An attitude is an evaluative intermediary between beliefs and behaviours
Defined by: attitude object, attitude valence, and (optionally) attitude intensity
Valence means attitudes sit on a continuum with opposing poles (positive/negative)
The A-B-C model captures how attitudes are experienced: Affect (good/bad feeling), Behaviour (approach/avoid), Cognition (associated beliefs and judgements)
Two major theories of how new attitudes form:
Self-perception theory: when internal states are weak or ambiguous, we notice our own reactions and infer an attitude from them. This is how most entirely new attitudes form.
Balance theory: we extrapolate new attitudes from consistency with prior attitudes and beliefs. Especially relevant for second-hand information.
Attitude change in already-formed attitudes is best explained by cognitive dissonance: the discomfort of noticing internal contradictions motivates us to resolve them.
We are poor at articulating our own attitudes in natural language; Likert scales and semantic differentials help
Social desirability undermines measurement: participants avoid responses they fear will draw negative judgement
Our ability to introspect is surprisingly limited; most of us have very little insight into how or why we think what we think
Attitudes best predict actions when: we have time to think, situational pressure is low, and we are paying attention
Explicit attitudes are conscious, endorsed by System 2
Implicit attitudes are automatic System 1 reactions; we may not be aware of them
When exposed to an attitude object, the implicit attitude fires first (System 1), then System 2 may endorse it as an explicit attitude
System 2 never works alone; it is always an optional layer atop System 1
Two broad approaches:
Bio-physiology: neuroimaging (fMRI, PET scans), biometrics (heart rate, galvanic skin conductance, facial micro-expressions, pupil dilation)
Behavioural manipulation: forcing reliance on implicit cognition by demanding rapid, unpredictable responses
The Implicit Association Test (IAT) is the most widely researched behavioural measure. It places participants in a timed sorting task with two binary concept pairings and measures performance differences. Most famous for revealing implicit racial bias.
Predictive value: when implicit and explicit scores align, behavioural prediction is extremely good.
Implicit attitudes are shaped by environmental exposure: media, gossip, prejudice, myth
Explicit attitudes are shaped by conscious, reflective endorsement based on core values and beliefs
They are closely related but ultimately different phenomena; neither is more "true" than the other
Social influence means having your judgements, opinions, attitudes or beliefs changed by exposure to those of others
Three levels: compliance (public agreement, private dissent), identification (emulating a liked other), internalisation (sincerely endorsing a norm, privately and publicly)
Conformity means aligning your behaviour, beliefs or judgement with the perceived normative standards of others
Social norms are stable, culturally transmitted behavioural standards. They are the most striking examples of purely intersubjective phenomena: real and independent of any one person, but existing only because many people believe they do.
Two partially overlapping processes drive conformity:
Informational influence: we internalise others' behaviour as evidence of what is true (desire to be correct)
Normative influence: we comply with others' expectations (desire to be accepted)
Problems with the traditional (Asch-based) view of conformity:
Asch framed conformity as a conflict between the individual and the group, with distinctly individualistic value judgements
When replicated in non-Western samples, these assumptions broke down
In reality, conformity is rarely maladaptive and often informative
Tajfel's Social Identity Theory offers an alternative:
Group membership is broken into three processes: social categorisation (what groups exist?), social identification (which are mine?), social comparison (are mine better?)
Group membership offers coordination benefits often worth forgoing individual interests
We only care about the normative standards of our ingroup
Identifying someone as an ingroup member signals a shared social reality and makes them a trustworthy informational source
Deindividuation is the temporary reduction in one's sense of self
In the West, this is viewed negatively: fear of losing individual moral character to a group role
Social roles provide scripts for behaviour and shape expectations; we switch between multiple roles throughout the day
Focused on the power of social roles to override individual character dispositions
Emphasis: roles provide scripts we follow when in doubt
Limitations: contrived and extreme design, easy to over-interpret, under-emphasised that guards dropped roles when they went home, neglected that we switch between roles daily
Three criticisms of the SPE:
Empirical: it overplayed the degree to which groups fall back on stereotyped norms rather than establishing their own
Theoretical: it suggested groups destroy agency, rather than fostering collective agency
Political: it was used to absolve individuals of group responsibility (Zimbardo testified as expert witness at Abu Ghraib)
Haslam and Reicher's key findings:
People act as individuals when group membership is secure, mobility between groups is high, or the group offers few benefits
People act collectively when boundaries are rigid, membership is insecure, and the group's benefits are clear
People internalise group standards in proportion to the benefits they perceive for maintaining membership
The IAT has been used to reveal implicit racial bias in people who sincerely believe themselves to be unprejudiced, with implications for hiring, policing and healthcare. Cognitive dissonance explains why people who publicly commit to a position become more entrenched in it: the discomfort of contradiction pushes them to align their private beliefs with their public stance. Haslam and Reicher's work explains why soldiers at Abu Ghraib cannot simply be excused as "products of the situation"; groups foster collective agency and shared responsibility.
Students often think implicit attitudes are more "true" than explicit attitudes. They are not; they are closely related but different phenomena.
Students assume conformity is inherently bad. In reality, conformity is usually adaptive and often the most rational response to uncertainty.
Students treat the Stanford Prison Experiment as definitive proof that situations override character entirely. The BBC experiment and its Social Identity Theory framework add essential nuance.
Students confuse compliance with internalisation. Compliance is surface-level agreement; internalisation means sincerely adopting the belief.
⚠️ Know the A-B-C model and the two key features (plus one optional) that define an attitude.
⚠️ Distinguish self-perception theory, balance theory and cognitive dissonance as explanations for attitude formation and change.
⚠️ Be able to explain what the IAT measures and why implicit and explicit attitudes can diverge.
⚠️ Know the three levels of social influence: compliance, identification, internalisation.
⚠️ Distinguish informational from normative influence.
⚠️ Know the three processes of social identity theory and how Haslam and Reicher's findings revise Zimbardo's conclusions.
⚠️ Know when people act as individuals vs. collectively, per Haslam and Reicher's take-home messages.
The A-B-C model stands for ______, ______ and ______. (Affect, Behaviour, Cognition)
True or False: Cognitive dissonance explains how entirely new attitudes form. (False, it explains change in already-formed attitudes. New attitude formation is explained by self-perception theory and balance theory.)
______ influence drives conformity through a desire to be correct; ______ influence through a desire to be accepted. (Informational; normative)
True or False: Implicit attitudes are more accurate than explicit attitudes. (False, they are different phenomena, neither more "true.")
According to Haslam and Reicher, people act collectively when group boundaries are ______, membership is ______, and benefits are ______. (rigid; insecure; clear)
Q: What are the two key features and one optional feature that define an attitude?
A: Attitude object and attitude valence, with optional attitude intensity.
Q: Attitudes are a cognitive intermediary between what two things?
A: Beliefs and actions.
Q: What do A, B and C stand for in the A-B-C model?
A: Affect (relevant emotion/mood), Behaviour (approach/avoid tendency), Cognition (associated knowledge and judgements).
Q: When do attitudes best predict our actions?
A: When we have time to think, situational pressure is low, and we are paying attention.
Q: What is the main mechanism for changing already-formed attitudes?
A: Cognitive dissonance.
Q: What do we call an attitude-like reaction that is purely System 1?
A: An implicit attitude.
Q: Through what methods can the activity of System 1 be measured?
A: Neuroimaging, biometrics, and ability-based associative tests (e.g. the IAT).
Q: What are the three levels of social influence?
A: Compliance, identification and internalisation.
Q: What are the two processes of conformity?
A: Informational influence (desire to be correct) and normative influence (desire to be accepted).
Q: What are the three primary processes of social identity theory?
A: Social categorisation, social identification and social comparison.
Q: What were Haslam and Reicher's main criticisms of the Stanford Prison Experiment?
A: Empirical (overplayed stereotyped norms), theoretical (suggested groups destroy agency), political (used to absolve individuals of group responsibility).
Q: According to Haslam and Reicher, when do people act collectively?
A: When group boundaries seem rigid, membership is insecure, and the group's benefits are clear.
The implicit/explicit distinction maps directly onto the System 1/System 2 framework from Week 5. Cognitive dissonance connects to self-concept (Week 3): a threatened self-narrative can produce dissonance that motivates attitude change. Social identity theory, introduced through stereotypes in Week 4, becomes the central framework for understanding conformity and group behaviour here. The power of the situation (Week 1) runs through both the Milgram experiment and the prison experiments.
attitude, attitude object, attitude valence, attitude intensity, A-B-C model, affect behaviour cognition, self-perception theory, balance theory, cognitive dissonance, social desirability, impression management, explicit attitude, implicit attitude, System 1, System 2, implicit cognition, explicit cognition, Implicit Association Test, IAT, Mahzarin Banaji, neuroimaging, fMRI, PET scan, biometrics, galvanic skin conductance, micro-expressions, pupil dilation, polygraph, social influence, compliance, identification, internalisation, conformity, social norms, intersubjective, informational influence, normative influence, Asch, social identity theory, Tajfel, social categorisation, social identification, social comparison, deindividuation, social roles, Stanford Prison Experiment, Zimbardo, BBC Prison Experiment, Haslam, Reicher, Abu Ghraib, PSY 201, NYU social psychology midterm