most theories of attitude change seem to agree that conflicting attitudes lead to attitude change.

3 min read 29-09-2024

Attitudes are the underlying beliefs and feelings that guide our behavior and decision-making processes. In psychology and social sciences, attitude change is a significant focus of study, particularly how conflicting attitudes can lead to shifts in belief systems. This article delves into the most prominent theories of attitude change, highlighting the role of conflicting attitudes, and providing analysis and practical examples to deepen our understanding.

Theories of Attitude Change

Several well-known theories explain how and why attitudes change when individuals are confronted with conflicting beliefs. Among them are:

Cognitive Dissonance Theory: Developed by Leon Festinger in the 1950s, cognitive dissonance occurs when an individual holds two or more contradictory beliefs or values. This dissonance creates psychological discomfort, prompting the person to either change their attitude, rationalize the conflict, or downplay the importance of one of the beliefs. For instance, a person who values health but smokes may experience dissonance and ultimately decide to quit smoking to resolve that conflict.
Social Judgment Theory: Proposed by Muzafer Sherif and Carl Hovland, this theory posits that when individuals are presented with new information, they compare it to their existing attitudes. If the new information is perceived as conflicting, it can either polarize their original stance or encourage a change in attitude. For example, a person who has always believed in a particular political party might reconsider their views if faced with compelling evidence of that party's failures.
Elaboration Likelihood Model (ELM): Developed by Richard Petty and John Cacioppo, the ELM suggests that attitude change occurs through two routes: the central route and the peripheral route. When individuals are motivated and able to process information deeply, they engage with conflicting arguments more thoroughly, often leading to lasting attitude change. Conversely, if individuals are less engaged, they might be swayed by superficial cues rather than the argument itself.

The Role of Conflicting Attitudes in Attitude Change

Conflicting attitudes often serve as catalysts for change, compelling individuals to re-evaluate their beliefs. This re-evaluation can happen through:

1. Internal Conflict

Internal conflict arises when an individual holds two opposing views about a subject. For example, a person who supports environmental conservation but also enjoys driving a gas-guzzling vehicle may feel discomfort. This conflict can lead to an attitude change, such as a commitment to using public transportation more often or even switching to a hybrid car.

2. Social Influence

Social dynamics can also lead to attitude change. When an individual is surrounded by peers who express contradictory beliefs, they may adjust their attitudes to align with the group to reduce discomfort or to avoid social isolation. For instance, a college student who has always been apathetic about voting might change their attitude after engaging with passionate peers who advocate for civic involvement.

3. Exposure to Counter-Attitudinal Information

Research indicates that exposure to information that contradicts one's beliefs can lead to attitude change if the person perceives the information as credible. For example, public health campaigns that provide evidence-based facts about the dangers of smoking can lead smokers to reassess their habits and potentially quit.

Analysis and Practical Implications

The implications of attitude change theories extend beyond academia into various real-world applications, including marketing, politics, and public health. Marketers can utilize cognitive dissonance by creating advertisements that highlight contradictions in consumers' behaviors, prompting them to change their purchasing habits. For example, a campaign that showcases the environmental impact of single-use plastics can push consumers towards more sustainable options, resolving the conflict between convenience and environmental responsibility.

In political arenas, understanding how conflicting attitudes can influence voter behavior allows strategists to craft persuasive messages that address and resolve these conflicts, potentially swaying undecided voters.

Conclusion

In summary, the exploration of conflicting attitudes and their impact on attitude change reveals the complexities of human psychology. The theories discussed—cognitive dissonance, social judgment, and the elaboration likelihood model—offer valuable insights into how and why people alter their beliefs in light of contradictions. As individuals navigate a world filled with diverse perspectives, understanding these dynamics can lead to more effective communication and persuasion strategies.

By actively engaging with conflicting attitudes and leveraging this understanding, we can foster personal growth and create a more informed and adaptable society.

References:

Festinger, L. (1957). A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance. Stanford University Press.
Sherif, M., & Hovland, C. I. (1961). Social Judgment: Assimilation and Contrast Effects in Communication and Attitude Change. Yale University Press.
Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1986). Communication and Persuasion: Central and Peripheral Routes to Attitude Change. Springer-Verlag.

By examining these foundational theories and their implications, readers can gain a nuanced understanding of attitude change, particularly as it pertains to conflicting beliefs.