Deck 9: Section 2: Cognitive Structures of Attitudes

Question 1

Which of the following would likely be more persuasive, an attractive communicator advocating an undesirable position or a desirable position? Describe why this is likely to be the case, citing empirical evidence from the text.
a. An attractive communicator advocating an undesirable position is more likely to be persuasive.
b. Because attractive people are expected to advocate attractive positions. The unexpected message, given the communicator's dispositions and communication setting, are more persuasive than messages that are predictable on the basis of who is saying them.
c. Empirical example: Attractive communicator who makes pessimistic statements about college grads.

Answer 1

Not Answer

Question 2

Name and define the three central components of conviction. Describe an attitude that you hold with conviction.
a. Emotional conviction: attitude that one feel is absolutely correct, cannot imagine ever changing your mind, is based on a moral sense of how things should work.
b. Ego preoccupation: often thinking about an issue, holding strong views, and being concerned.
c. Cognitive elaboration: having held the view for a while, connecting to other issues, knowing a lot about it, explaining it easily.
d. Varies.

Answer 2

Not Answer

Question 3

What are some characteristics of strong attitudes? Describe how they are formed, how they relate to other attitudes, and some behavioral consequences of attitude strength.
a. Strong attitudes tend to be: stable, easily accessible, consistent with other strong attitudes, & facilitate differentiation between choices.
b. Predicts information-seeking.
c. Inhibits persuasion.
d. More predictive of behavior than weak attitudes.

Answer 3

Not Answer

Question 4

How strong is the evidence for selective exposure, attention, perception, learning, and recall? What are the limitations to our knowledge about these phenomena?

Question 5

Explain how decision making processes can be different for groups than they would be for individuals. What are some possible outcomes of group decision-making processes? What are some mechanisms underlying these effects?
a. Group polarization - risky shift, or extreme caution.
b. Persuasive arguments theory - new information vs. supporting pre-existing positions.
c. Social comparison processes about others' positions.
d. Normative influence/conformity.
e. Diffusion of responsibility less currently favored).

Question 6

What were some of the problems with the "diffusion of responsibility" explanation for why groups gravitate toward riskier decisions than individuals? What explanations) might better fit the experimental evidence?