Educators (as well as advertisers, marketers, and politicians) are particularly interested in the behavioral aspect of attitudes. Because it is normal that the ABCs of our attitudes are at least somewhat consistent, our behavior tends to follow from our affect and cognition. If I determine that you have more positive cognitions about and more positive affect toward Cheerios than Frosted Flakes, then I will naturally predict (and probably be correct when I do so) that you’ll be more likely to buy Cheerios than Frosted Flakes when you go to the market. Furthermore, if I can do something to make your thoughts or feelings toward Frosted Flakes more positive, then your likelihood of buying that cereal instead of the other will also increase.
The principle of attitude consistency (that for any given attitude object, the ABCs of affect, behavior, and cognition are normally in line with each other) thus predicts that our attitudes (for instance, as measured via a self-report measure) are likely to guide behavior. Supporting this idea, meta-analyses have found that there is a significant and substantial positive correlation among the different components of attitudes, and that attitudes expressed on self-report measures do predict behavior (Glasman & Albarracín, 2006).
Although there is generally consistency between attitudes and behavior, the relationship is stronger in certain situations, for certain people, and for certain attitudes (Wicker, 1969). The theory of planned behavior, developed by Martin Fishbein and Izek Ajzen (Ajzen, 1991; Fishbein & Ajzen, 1975), outlined many of the important variables that affected the attitude-behavior relationship, and some of these factors are summarized in the list that follows this paragraph. It may not surprise you to hear that attitudes that are strong, in the sense that they are expressed quickly and confidently, predict our behavior better than do weak attitudes (Fazio, Powell, & Williams, 1989; Glasman & Albarracín, 2006). For example, Farc and Sagarin (2009) found that people who could more quickly complete questionnaires about their attitudes toward the politicians George Bush and John Kerry were also more likely to vote for the candidate that they had more positive attitudes toward in the 2004 presidential elections. The relationship between the responses on the questionnaires and voting behavior was weaker for those who completed the items more slowly.
The match between the social situations in which the attitudes are expressed and the behaviors are engaged in also matters, such that there is a greater attitude-behavior correlation when the social situations match.
You can see that the problem here is that Magritte’s attitude is being expressed in one social situation (when she is with her parents) whereas the behavior (trying a cigarette) is going to occur in a very different social situation (when she is out with her friends). The relevant social norms are of course much different in the two situations. Magritte’s friends might be able to convince her to try smoking, despite her initial negative attitude, when they entice her with peer pressure. Behaviors are more likely to be consistent with attitudes when the social situation in which the behavior occurs is similar to the situation in which the attitude is expressed (Ajzen, 1991; LaPiere, 1936).
Reference
Abelson, R. P., Kinder, D. R., Peters, M. D., & Fiske, S. T. (1981). Affective and semantic components in political person perception.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 42
, 619–630.
Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior.
Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50
(2), 179–211.
Albarracín, D., Johnson, B. T., & Zanna, M. P. (Eds.). (2005).
The handbook of attitudes
(pp. 223–271). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum
Banaji, M. R., & Heiphetz, L. (2010). Attitudes. In S. T. Fiske, D. T. Gilbert, & G. Lindzey (Eds.),
Handbook of social psychology
(5th ed., Vol. 1, pp. 353–393). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
Bargh, J. A., Chaiken, S., Raymond, P., & Hymes, C. (1996). The automatic evaluation effect: Unconditional automatic attitude activation with a pronunciation task.
Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 32
(1), 104–128.
Beaman, A. L., Klentz, B., Diener, E., & Svanum, S. (1979). Self-awareness and transgression in children: Two field studies.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37
(10), 1835–1846.
Bourgeois, M. J. (2002). Heritability of attitudes constrains dynamic social impact.
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28
(8), 1063–1072.
Cunningham, W. A., Raye, C. L., & Johnson, M. K. (2004). Implicit and explicit evaluation: fMRI correlates of valence, emotional intensity, and control in the processing of attitudes.
Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 16
(10), 1717–1729.
Cunningham, W. A., & Zelazo, P. D. (2007). Attitudes and evaluations: A social cognitive neuroscience perspective.
Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 11
(3), 97–104.
De Houwer, J., Thomas, S., & Baeyens, F. (2001).
Association learning of likes and dislikes: A review of 25 years of research on human evaluative conditioning.
Psychological Bulletin, 127
(6), 853–869.
Downing, J. W., Judd, C. M., & Brauer, M. (1992). Effects of repeated expressions on attitude extremity.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63
(1), 17–29.
Duckworth, K. L., Bargh, J. A., Garcia, M., & Chaiken, S. (2002). The automatic evaluation of novel stimuli.
Psychological Science, 13
(6), 513–519.
Farc, M.-M., & Sagarin, B. J. (2009).
Using attitude strength to predict registration and voting behavior in the 2004 U.S. presidential elections.
Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 31
(2), 160–173.
Fazio, R. H. (1990). The MODE model as an integrative framework.
Advances in Experimental Social Psychology
,
23
, 75–109.
Fazio, R. H. (1995). Attitudes as object-evaluation associations: Determinants, consequences, and correlates of attitude accessibility. In
Attitude strength: Antecedents and consequences
(pp. 247–282). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Fazio, R. H., Powell, M. C., & Herr, P. M. (1983). Toward a process model of the attitude-behavior relation: Accessing one’s attitude upon mere observation of the attitude object.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 44
(4), 723–735.
Fazio, R. H., Powell, M. C., & Williams, C. J. (1989). The role of attitude accessibility in the attitude-to-behavior process.
Journal of Consumer Research, 16
(3), 280–288.
Ferguson, M. J., Bargh, J. A., & Nayak, D. A. (2005).
After-affects: How automatic evaluations influence the interpretation of subsequent, unrelated stimuli.
Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 41
(2), 182–191.
Glasman, L. R., & Albarracín, D. (2006). Forming attitudes that predict future behavior: A meta-analysis of the attitude-behavior relation.
Psychological Bulletin, 132
(5), 778–822.
Handy, T. C., Smilek, D., Geiger, L., Liu, C., & Schooler, J. W. (2010).
ERP evidence for rapid hedonic evaluation of logos.
Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 22
(1), 124–138.
Hargreaves, D. A., & Tiggemann, M. (2003). Female “thin ideal” media images and boys’ attitudes toward girls.
Sex Roles, 49
(9–10), 539–544.
Krosnick, J. A., & Petty, R. E. (1995). Attitude strength: An overview. In
Attitude strength: Antecedents and consequences
(pp. 1–24). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
LaPiere, R. T. (1936). Type rationalization of group antipathy.
Social Forces, 15
, 232–237.
Levina, M., Waldo, C. R., & Fitzgerald, L. F. (2000). We’re here, we’re queer, we’re on TV: The effects of visual media on heterosexuals’ attitudes toward gay men and lesbians.
Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 30
(4), 738–758.
Maio, G. R., & Olson, J. M. (Eds.). (2000).
Why we evaluate: Functions of attitudes
. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Mendes, W. B. (2008). Assessing autonomic nervous system reactivity. In E. Harmon-Jones & J. Beer (Eds.),
Methods in the neurobiology of social and personality psychology
(pp. 118–147). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
Olson, J. M., Vernon, P. A., Harris, J. A., & Jang, K. L. (2001).
The heritability of attitudes: A study of twins.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80
(6), 845–860.
Poteat, V. P. (2007). Peer group socialization of homophobic attitudes and behavior during adolescence.
Child Development, 78
(6), 1830–1842.
Stangor, C., Sullivan, L. A., & Ford, T. E. (1991). Affective and cognitive determinants of prejudice.
Social Cognition, 9
(4), 359–380.
Tesser, A., Martin, L., & Mendolia, M. (Eds.). (1995).
The impact of thought on attitude extremity and attitude-behavior consistency
. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Thompson, M. M., Zanna, M. P., & Griffin, D. W. (1995). Let’s not be indifferent about (attitudinal) ambivalence. In
Attitude strength: Antecedents and consequences
(pp. 361–386). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
van den Bos, W., McClure, S. M., Harris, L. T., Fiske, S. T., & Cohen, J. D. (2007). Dissociating affective evaluation and social cognitive processes in the ventral medial prefrontal cortex.
Cognitive, Affective & Behavioral Neuroscience, 7
(4), 337–346.
Wood, W. (2000).
Attitude Change: Persuasion and Social Influence. Annual review of psychology.
51. 539-70.