Attitudes and Alternative Evaluation

p.n.l

Consumer Behavior

Topic Highlights Definition of Attitudes Why Do We Hold Attitudes? How Are Attitudes Formed? The Components of Attitude The Attitude-Behavior Relationship Alternative Evaluation Multiattribute Attitude Models Noncompensatory Decision Rules

Attitude: Definition

An attitude is a learned predisposition to respond in a consistently favorable or unfavorable manner with respect to a given object

Functions:Why Do We Hold Attitudes? Utilitarian Function: We form positive attitudes

towards products that give us “pleasure” and negative towards ones that give us “pain.”

Value-expressive Function: A product attitude is based on what we think that attitude says about us. The attitude is a function of our self-concept.

Ego-defensive Function: Our product attitudes are a result of us “protecting” ourselves from psychological threats.

Knowledge Function: Product attitudes are formed as a result of our need for order, structure, and meaning.

Forming Attitudes Theory of Cognitive Dissonance Self-Perception Theory

Can behavior influence attitudes? Social Judgment Theory

Latitudes of Acceptance and Rejection Assimilation Effect Contrast Effect

Forming Attitudes (contd.) Balance Theory

Triads contain: (1) A Person and His or Her Perception of;

(2) an Attitude Object and; (3) Some Other Person or Object

Balanced Unit Relation (like belief – element “belongs” to another) Sentiment Relation (like affect – preference for element)

Application of Balance Theory

Traditional View of Attitude

ATTITUDE

Cognitive Component

(Beliefs)

Conative Component (Behavioral Intentions)

Affective Component (Feelings)

Attitude Effects

Alternative View of Attitude

Beliefs Feelings

Attitude

Behavioral Intention

Behavior

Predictive Vs. Diagnostic Power

Beliefs Feelings

Attitude

Behavioral Intention

Behavior

Weaker Stronger

Stronger Weaker

PredictivePower

DiagnosticPower

The Attitude-Behavior Relationship

LaPiere (1934) Traveled with Chinese graduate student around the

country one summer Concluded that attitudes do not influence behavior

Wicker (1969) Meta-analysis of 33 studies Concluded that attitude-behavior relationship is, at

best, weak

Explanations for this Evidence Lack of Correspondence in Levels of

Specificity Action, Target, Time, Context

Time Interval Social Influences Other Nonattitudinal Influences

Correspondence in Levels of Specificity Action Component

Attitude measurement and behavior measurement should correspond in terms of action

Target Component Attitude measure and behavior measure

should be as specific as each other in terms of target

Correspondence in Levels of Specificity (contd.) Time Component

If time frame for completion of behavior is relevant, it should be included in measure of attitude

Context Component If the context within which a behavior is

performed is relevant, it should be considered in the measure of attitude

Explantions for Evidence on Attitude-Behavior Relationship

Correspondence in Levels of Specificity Time Interval

The closer in time the measurement of attitude and the measurement of behavior, the higher will be the relationship

Social Influences Reference groups may influence your behavior in a certain direction

irrespective of attitude

Other Nonattitudinal Influences Financial constraints, environmental constraints, etc.

Determining the Choice SetAll Possible Choice Alternatives

Evoked SetAlternatives known

to the consumer

Inept SetAlternatives unknown

to the consumer

Consideration SetAlternatives considered during decision making

Inert SetAlternatives not considered

during decision making

Brand PurchasedBrands considered but

not purchased

The Alternative Evaluation Process

Determine Evaluative

Criteria

Determine Choice

Alternatives

Assess Performance of Alternatives

Apply Decision Rule

Compensatory Decision Rules

Multi-Attribute (Expectancy-Value) Models Consider the determinants or factors that underlie

evaluation or attitude In general, we like (have favorable attitude towards)

objects we associate with “good attributes” and develop unfavorable feelings towards objects we associate with “bad attributes”

A Multi-Attribute Model

If we can estimate Probablity (attribute), and Value (attribute)

Then we should be able to predict a person’s evaluation of the object (department store)

Wide Selection

Convenient Locations

High Quality

Low Price

Department Store

Types of Multiattribute Models

Fishbein Model

Ao=biei Ideal Point Model

Ao=Wi|Ii-Xi|Where:Ao=Attitude towards objectbi=Belief that object possesses attribute iei=Evaluation of attribute in=Number of salient attributesWi=Importance weight of attribute iIi=Ideal point for attribute iXi=Performance of brand X on attribute i

i=1

n

i=1

n

Evaluation MeasuresEvaluation (ei):

A store with a wide selection of products is:good ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ bad

+3 0 -3

A store with low prices is:good ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ bad

+3 0 -3

Belief MeasuresBelief (bi):

Store X has a wide selection of products is: likely ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ unlikely

+3 0 -3

Store X has low prices is: probable ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ improbable

+3 0 -3

A Multiattribute Evaluation

Wide Selection +2 +2 +3 +3

Low Price -1 +3 -2 -1

High Quality +3 -1 +3 +1

ConvenientLocations

+2 +2 +2 +3

Attribute ei Store X Store Y Store Z

Beliefs

Strengths of Multiattribute Models Looks at a BASIS for attitudes Can provide diagnostic help Can reveal whether consumer perceptions

are accurate

Changing Attitudes Change belief (e.g., change product, advertising,

etc.) Change evaluation (e.g., Nakamichi tape decks) Add a dimension (e.g., Bud “born-on” date) Change decision rule (e.g., shift to

noncompensatory rule) Change beliefs about competitors (e.g., “Their

cars are not made in America”)

Noncompensatory Decision Rules Lexicographic Rule

Select most important attribute; pick brand that does best on that attribute. In case of tie, go to next most important attribute and so on

Elimination by Aspects Establish cutoff, then select most important attribute;

pick brand that meets cutoff on most important attribute; in case of tie, consider next most important attribute and pick brand that meets cutoff on that attribute

Noncompensatory Rules (contd.) Conjunctive Rule

Establish cutoff levels for all attributes and select brand that meets cutoffs on all attributes

Disjunctive Rule Establish cutoff for all attributes and select

brand that meets cutoff on at least one attribute (i.e., brand must have some redeeming feature)