Attitude Strength

Annual Review of Psychology

Volumn 68, Issue , 2017, Pages 327-351

  Howe, Lauren C ^a   Krosnick, Jon A ^a  

^a STANFORD UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Attitude; Impact; Importance; Stability; Strength

Indexed keywords

ATTITUDE; BEHAVIOR; HUMAN; PROCEDURES; SOCIAL BEHAVIOR; SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY;

ATTITUDE; HUMANS; INTENTION; PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL; SOCIAL BEHAVIOR; SOCIAL IDENTIFICATION;

EID: 85009512567     PISSN: 00664308     EISSN: 15452085     Source Type: Book Series    
DOI: 10.1146/annurev-psych-122414-033600     Document Type: Review

References (128)

1. Abramowitz AI. 1995. It's abortion, stupid: policy voting in the 1992 presidential election. J. Polit. 57:176-86
2. Ajzen I, Fishbein M. 1980. Understanding Attitudes and Predicting Social Behavior. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall
3. Ajzen A,Timko C, White JB. 1982. Self-monitoring and the attitude-behavior relation. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 42:426-35
4. Anand S, Krosnick JA. 2003. The impact of attitudes toward foreign policy goals on public preferences among presidential candidates: a study of issue publics and the attentive public in the 2000 US presidential election. Pres. Stud. Q. 33:31-71
5. Anderson CA. 1983. Imagination and expectation: the effect of imagining behavioral scripts on personal intentions. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 45:293-305
6. Ansolabehere S, Rodden J, Snyder JM. 2008. The strength of issues: using multiple measures to gauge preference stability, ideological constraint, and issue voting. Am. Polit. Sci. Rev. 102(2):215-32
7. Bassili JN. 1996. Meta-judgmental versus operative indexes of psychological attributes: the case of measures of attitude strength. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 71(4):637-53
8. Bassili JN, Krosnick JA. 2000. Do strength-related attitude properties determine susceptibility to response effects? New evidence from response latency, attitude extremity, and aggregate indices. Polit. Psychol. 21(1):107-32
9. Bem DJ. 1972. Self-perception theory. In Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, ed. L Berkowitz, pp. 1-62. San Diego, CA: Academic
10. Berent MK, Krosnick JA. 1995. The relation between political attitude importance and knowledge structure. In Political Judgment: Structure and Process, ed.MLodge, KMcGraw, pp. 91-109. Ann Arbor:Univ. Mich. Press
11. Bishop GF. 1990. Issue involvement and response effects in public opinion surveys. Public Opin. Q. 54:209-18
12. Bizer GY, Krosnick JA. 2001. Exploring the structure of strength-related attitude features: the relation between attitude importance and attitude accessibility. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 81(4):566-86
13. BlankenshipKL, WegenerDT. 2008. Opening the mind to close it:Considering amessage in light of important values increases message processing and later resistance to change. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 94(2):196-213
14. Bolsen T. 2013. A light bulb goes on: norms, rhetoric, and actions for the public good. Polit. Behav. 35(1):1-20
15. Boninger DS, Krosnick JA, Berent MK. 1995a. Origins of attitude importance: self-interest, social identification, and value relevance. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 68(1):61-80
16. Boninger DS, Krosnick JA, Berent MK, Fabrigar L. 1995b. The causes and consequences of attitude importance. See Petty &Krosnick 1995, pp. 159-90
17. Boyd RW,Wengrovitz SM. 2005. The elusive concept of issue publics: issue salience in American elections. Presented at Annu. Meet. Int. Soc. Political Psychol., 28th, Toronto, Canada
18. Brandt MJ, Wetherell GA. 2012. What attitudes are moral attitudes? The case of attitude heritability. Soc. Psychol. Personal. Sci. 3(2):172-79
19. Britt TW, Millard MR, Sundareswaran PT, Moore D. 2009. Personality variables predict strength-related attitude dimensions across objects. J. Personal. 77(3):859-82
20. BrittTW, Pusilo CL,McKibben ES, KelleyC, Baker AN,Nielson KA. 2011. Personality and strength-related attitude dimensions: between and within person relationships. J. Res. Personal. 45(6):586-96
21. Cacioppo JT, Petty RE. 1981. Effects of extent of thought on the pleasantness ratings of P-O-X trials: evidence for three judgmental tendencies in evaluating social situations. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 40(6):1000-9
22. Campbell JD. 1986. Similarity and uniqueness: the effects of attribute type, relevance, and individual differences in self esteem and depression. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 50:281-94
23. CarseyTM, Layman GC. 2006. Changing sides or changingminds? Party identification and policy preferences in the American electorate. Am. J. Polit. Sci. 50(2):464-77
24. Charng HW, Piliavin JA, Callero PL. 1988. Role identity and reasoned action in the prediction of repeated behavior. Soc. Psychol. Q. 51(4):303-17
25. Chen C, Petrick JF. 2014. The roles of perceived travel benefits, importance, and constraints in predicting travel behavior. J. Travel Res. 55:509-22
26. Ciuk DJ, Yost BA. 2016. The effects of issue salience, elite influence, and policy content on public opinion. Polit. Commun. 33(2):328-45
27. Collins AM, Loftus EF. 1975. A spreading activation theory of semantic processing. Psychol. Rev. 82:407-28
28. Costarelli S, Colloca P. 2007. The moderation of ambivalence on attitude-intention relations as mediated by attitude importance. Eur. J. Soc. Psychol. 37(5):923-33
29. Cullum JG, Okdie BM, Harton HC. 2011. When my country is at war: Issue importance and interpersonal influence lead Iraq War attitudes to cluster within social networks. Soc. Influ. 6(4):231-48
30. Dawson E, Gilovich T, Regan DT. 2002. Motivated reasoning and performance on theWason selection task. Personal. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 28:1379-87
31. DiClemente RJ, Forrest KA, Mickler S. 1990. College students' knowledge and attitudes about AIDS and changes in HIV-preventive behaviors. AIDS Educ. Prev. 2(3):201-12
32. Eaton AA, Visser PS. 2008. Attitude importance: understanding the causes and consequences of passionately held views. Soc. Personal. Psychol. Compass 2(4):1719-36
33. Fabrigar LR, Krosnick JA. 1995. Attitude importance and the false consensus effect. Personal. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 21(5):468-79 www.annualreviews.org Attitude Strength 347
34. Falk EB, Spunt RP, Lieberman MD. 2012. Ascribing beliefs to ingroup and outgroup political candidates: neural correlates of perspective-taking, issue importance and days until the election. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B 367:731-43
35. Farc MM, Sagarin BJ. 2009. Using attitude strength to predict registration and voting behavior in the 2004 U.S. presidential elections. Basic Appl. Soc. Psychol. 31(2):160-73
36. Fazio RH. 1990. Multiple processes by which attitudes guide behavior: the MODE model as an integrative framework. Adv. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 23:75-109
37. Festinger L. 1957. A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance. Stanford, CA: Stanford Univ. Press
38. Fisher JD, Fisher WA. 1992. Changing AIDS risk behavior. Psychol. Bull. 111(3):455-74
39. Fiske ST, Taylor SE. 2013. Social Cognition: From Brains to Culture. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications
40. Forrest LN, Smith AR, Fussner LM, Dodd DR, Clerkin EM. 2016. Using implicit attitudes of exercise importance to predict explicit exercise dependence symptoms and exercise behaviors. Psychol. Sport Exerc. 22:91-97
41. Fournier P, Blais A, Nadeau R, Gidengil E, Nevitte N. 2003. Issue importance and performance voting. Polit. Behav. 25:51-67
42. Franc R. 1999. Attitude strength and the attitude-behavior domain: magnitude and independence of moderating effects of different strength indices. J. Soc. Behav. Personal. 14(2):177-95
43. Garcia RL, Bergsieker HB, Shelton JN. 2015. Racial attitude (dis)similarity and liking in same-race minority interactions. Group Process. Intergr. Relat. 2015:1368430215612224
44. Glynn CJ, Park E. 1997. Reference groups, opinion intensity, and public opinion expression. Int. J. Public Opin. Res. 9(3):213-32
45. Gopinath M, Nyer PU. 2009. The effect of public commitment on resistance to persuasion: the influence of attitude certainty, issue importance, susceptibility to normative influence, preference for consistency and source proximity. Intern. J. Res. Market 26(1):60-68
46. Grube JA, Piliavin JA. 2000. Role identity, organizational experiences, and volunteer performance. Personal. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 26(9):1108-19
47. Grynaviski JD, Corrigan BE. 2006. Specification issues in proximitymodels of candidate evaluation (with issue importance). Polit. Anal. 14(4):393-420
48. Haddock G, Rothman AJ, Reber R, Schwarz N. 1999. Forming judgments of attitude certainty, intensity, and importance: the role of subjective experiences. Personal. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 25:771-82
49. Hart W, Albarracín D, Eagly AH, Brechan I, Lindberg MJ, Merrill L. 2009. Feeling validated versus being correct: a meta-analysis of selective exposure to information. Psychol. Bull. 135(4):555-88
50. Heider F. 1958. The Psychology of Interpersonal Relations. New York:Wiley
51. Helweg-LarsenM, Collins BE. 1997. A social psychological perspective on the role of knowledge about AIDS in AIDS prevention. Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci. 6(2):23-26
52. Hippler HJ, Schwarz N. 1986. Not forbidding isn't allowing: the cognitive basis of the forbid-allow asymmetry. Public Opin. Q. 50:87-96
53. Hofmann W, Gschwendner T, Schmitt M. 2005. On implicit-explicit consistency: the moderating role of individual differences in awareness and adjustment. Eur. J. Personal. 19(1):25-49
54. Holbrook AL, Berent MK, Krosnick JA, Visser PS, Boninger DS. 2005. Attitude importance and the accumulation of attitude-relevant knowledge in memory. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 88:749-69
55. Holbrook AL, Sterrett D, Johnson TP, Krysan M. 2016. Racial disparities in political participation across issues: the role of issue-specific motivators. Polit. Behav. 38:1-32
56. Holland RW, Verplanken B, van Knippenberg A. 2003. From repetition to conviction: attitude accessibility as a determinant of attitude certainty. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 39(6):594-601
57. Honaken P,Verplanken B. 2004. Understanding attitudes towards genetically modified food: the role of values and attitude strength. J. Consum. Policy 4:401-20
58. Hübner G, Mohs A, Peterson LE. 2014. The role of attitude strength in predicting organ donation behavior by implicit and explicit attitudes. Open J. Med. Psychol. 3(5):355-63
59. Jarvis B, Petty RE. 1996. The need to evaluate. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 70:172-94
60. Jett J, Thapa B, Swett R. 2013. Boater speed compliance in manatee zones: examining a proposed predictive model. Soc. Nat. Resour. 26:95-104
61. Judd CM, Krosnick JA. 1989. The structural bases of consistency among political attitudes: the effects of political expertise and attitude importance. In Attitude Structure and Function, ed. AR Pratkanis, SJ Breckler, AG Greenwald, pp. 99-128. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum
62. Karpinski A, Steinman RB, Hilton JL. 2005. Attitude importance as a moderator of the relationship between implicit and explicit attitude measures. Personal. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 31(7):949-62
63. Kemmelmeier M, Burnstein E, Peng K. 1999. Individualism and authoritarianism shape attitudes toward physician-assisted suicide. J. Appl. Soc. Psychol. 29(12):2613-31
64. Klar S. 2013. Identity and engagement among political independents in America. Polit. Psychol. 35(4):577-91
65. Klar S. 2014. A multidimensional study of ideological preferences and priorities among the American public. Public Opin. Q. 78(1):344-59
66. Knobloch-Westerwick S, Johnson BK,Westerwick A. 2015. Confirmation bias in online searches: impacts of selective exposure before an election on political attitude strength and shifts. J. Comput.Mediat. Commun. 20(2):171-87
67. Knobloch-Westerwick S, Meng J. 2009. Looking the other way: selective exposure to attitude-consistent and counter-attitudinal political information. Commun. Res. 36(3):426-48
68. Kokkinaki F, Lunt P. 1997. The relationship between involvement, attitude accessibility, and attitude-behavior consistency. Br. J. Soc. Psychol. 36(4):497-509
69. Krosnick JA. 1988. Attitude importance and attitude change. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 24:240-55
70. Krosnick JA. 1989. Attitude importance and attitude accessibility. Personal. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 15(3):297-308
71. Krosnick JA. 1990. Government policy and citizen passion: a study of issue publics in contemporary America. Polit. Behav. 12:59-92
72. Krosnick JA. 1992. The impact of cognitive sophistication and attitude importance on response order effects and question order effects. In Order Effects in Social and Psychological Research, ed. N Schwartz, S Sudman, pp. 203-18. New York: Springer-Verlag
73. Krosnick JA, Berent MK, Boninger DS. 1994. Pockets of responsibility in the American electorate: findings of a research program on attitude importance. Polit. Commun. 11(4):391-411
74. Krosnick JA, Boninger DS, Chuang YC, Berent MK, Carnot CG. 1993. Attitude strength: one construct or many related constructs? J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 65(6):1132-51
75. Krosnick JA, Petty RE. 1995. Attitude strength: an overview. See Petty &Krosnick 1995, pp. 1-24
76. Krosnick JA, Schuman H. 1988. Attitude intensity, importance, and certainty and susceptibility to response effects. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 54(6):940-52
77. Krosnick JA, Telhami S. 1995. Public attitudes toward Israel: a study of the attentive and issue publics. Int. Stud. Q. 39(4):535-54
78. LaPiere RT. 1934. Attitudes versus action. Soc. Forces 13(2):230-37
79. Lavine H, BorgidaE, Sullivan J. 2000.Onthe relationship between attitude involvement and attitude accessibility: toward a cognitive-motivational model of political information processing. Polit. Psychol. 21(1):81-106
80. Lavine H, Borgida E, Sullivan J, Thomsen C. 1996. The relationship of national and personal issue salience to attitude accessibility on foreign and domestic policy issues. Polit. Psychol. 17(2):293-316
81. Lavine H, Huff JW, Wagner SH, Sweeney D. 1998. The moderating influence of attitude strength on the susceptibility to context effects. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 75(2):359-73
82. Lecheler S, de Vreese CH, Slothuus R. 2009. Issue importance as a moderator of framing effects. Commun. Res. 36(3):400-25
83. Leeper TJ. 2014. The informational basis for mass polarization. Public Opin. Q. 78(1):27-46
84. Levendusky MS, Druckman JN, McLain A. 2016. How group discussions create strong attitudes and strong partisans. Res. Polit. 3:1-6
85. Liu C, Lee H, Huang P, Chen H, Sommers S. 2016. Do incompatible arguments cause extensive processing in the evaluation of arguments? The role of congruence between argument compatibility and argument quality. Br. J. Soc. Psychol. 107:179-98
86. Liu J, Latane B. 1998a. The catastrophic link between the importance and extremity of political attitudes. Polit. Behav. 20(2):105-26
87. Liu J, Latane B. 1998b. Extremization of attitudes: Does thought and discussion-induced polarization cumulate? Basic Appl. Soc. Psychol. 20(2):103-10 www.annualreviews.org Attitude Strength 349
88. Lo V, Wei R, Lu H, Hou H. 2015. Perceived issue importance, information processing, and third-person effect of news about the imported U.S. beef controversy. Int. J. Public Opin. Res. 27(3):341-60
89. MacInnis B, Krosnick JA. 2016. The impact of candidates' statements about global warming on electoral success in 2008 to 2015: evidence using five methodologies. In Explorations in Political Psychology, ed. JA Krosnick, IC Chiang, T Stark. New York: Psychol. Press. In press
90. Malhotra N, Tahk AM. 2011. Specification issues in assessing the moderating role of issue importance: a comment on Grynaviski and Corrigan 2006. Polit. Anal. 19(3):342-50
91. Mann J, Tarantola DJM, Netter TW. 1992. The HIV pandemic: status and trends. In AIDS in theWorld, ed. J Mann, D Tarantola, pp. 11-108. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Press
92. Matthes J, Rios MorrisonK, Schemer C. 2010.A spiral of silence for some: attitude certainty and the expression of political minority opinions. Commun. Res. 37(6):774-800
93. Miller JM, Krosnick JA, Holbrook AL, Tahk A, Dionne A. 2016. The impact of policy change threat on financial contributions to interest groups. In Explorations in Political Psychology, ed. JA Krosnick, ICChiang, T Stark. New York: Psychol. Press. In press
94. Mokdad AH, Marks JS, Stroup DF, Gerberding JL. 2004. Actual causes of death in the United States, 2000. J. Am. Med. Assoc. 291(10):1238-45
95. Morrison KR, Matthes J. 2011. Socially motivated projection: Need to belong increases perceived opinion consensus on important issues. Eur. J. Soc. Psychol. 41(6):707-19
96. Nederhof AJ. 1989. Self-involvement, intention certainty and attitude-intention consistency.Br. J. Soc. Psychol. 28:123-33
97. Nosek B. 2005. Moderators of the relationship between implicit and explicit evaluation. J. Exp. Psychol. Gen. 134(4):565-84
98. Olson JM, Vernon PA, Harris JA, Jang KL. 2001. The heritability of attitudes: a study of twins. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 80(6):845-60
99. Perloff RM. 2013. The Dynamics of Persuasion: Communication and Attitudes in the 21st Century. New York: Routledge
100. Petty RE, Krosnick JA. 1995. Attitude Strength: Antecedents and Consequences. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum
101. Pfau M, Roskos-Ewoldsen D, Wood M, Yin S, Cho J, et al. 2003. Attitude accessibility as an alternative for how inculation confers resistance. Commun. Monogr. 70(1):39-51
102. Pomerantz EM, Chaiken S, Tordesillas RS. 1995. Attitude strength and resistance processes. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 69(3):408-19
103. Pryor JB, Gibbons FX, Wicklund RA, Fazio RH, Hood R. 1977. Self-focused attention and self-report validity. J. Personal. 45:513-27
104. RoeseNJ, OlsonT. 1994. Attitude importance as a function of repeated attitude expression. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 30(1):39-51
105. Rogers TF, Singer E, Imperio J. 1993. The polls: poll trends. AIDS-an update. Public Opin. Q. 57:92-114
106. Ross L, Greene D, House P. 1977. The "false consensus effect": an egocentric bias in social perception and attribution processes. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 13:279-301
107. Sanbonmatsu DM, Uchino BN, BirminghamW. 2011. On the importance of knowing your partner's views: Attitude familiarity is associated with better interpersonal functioning and lower ambulatory blood pressure in daily life. Ann. Behav. Med. 41:131-37
108. Schoenefeld JJ, McCauley MR. 2015. Local is not always better: the impact of climate information on values, behavior, and policy support. J. Env. Stud. Sci. 2015. doi: 10.1007/s13412-015-0288-y SchumanH
109. Presser S. 1981. Questions and Answers in Attitude Surveys: Experiments on Question Form,Wording, and Context. New York: Academic
110. Sevelius J, Stake J. 2003. The effect of prior attitudes and attitude importance on attitude change and class impact in women's and gender studies. J. Appl. Soc. Psychol. 33(11):2341-53
111. Starzyk KB, Fabrigar LR, Soryal AS, Fanning JJ. 2009. A painful reminder: the role of level and salience of attitude importance in cognitive dissonance. Personal. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 35(1):126-37
112. Stephenson MT, Benoit WL, Tschida DA. 2001. Testing the mediating role of cognitive responses in the elaboration likelihood model. Commun. Stud. 52(4):324-37
113. Tesser A. 1978. Self-generated attitude change. In Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, ed. L Berkowitz, pp. 298-338. New York: Academic
114. Tesser A, Martin L, Mendolia M. 1995. The impact of thought on attitude extremity and attitude-behavior consistency. See Petty &Krosnick 1995, pp. 73-92
115. Thomsen C, Lavine H, Kounios J. 2006. Social value and attitude concepts in semantic memory: relational structure, concept strength, and the fan effect. Soc. Cogn. 14(3):191-225
116. Uchino BN, Sanbonmatsu DM, Birmingham W. 2013. Knowing your partner is not enough: Spousal importance moderates the link between attitude familiarity and ambulatory blood pressure. J. Behav. Med. 36(6):549-55
117. van Herreveld F, van der Pligt J. 2004. Attitudes as stable and transparent constructions. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 40(5):666-74
118. vanHerreveld F, Pligt J, VriesNK,Andreas S. 2000. The structure of attitudes: attribute importance, accessibility and judgment. Br. J. Soc. Psychol. 39(3):363-80
119. Visser PS, Krosnick JA. 1998. Development of attitude strength over the life cycle: surge and decline. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 75(6):1389-410
120. Visser PS, Krosnick JA, Norris CJ. 2016. Attitude importance and attitude-relevant knowledge: motivator and enabler. In Explorations in Political Psychology, ed. JA Krosnick, IC Chiang, T Stark. New York: Psychol. Press. In press
121. Visser PS, Krosnick JA, Simmons JP. 2003. Distinguishing the cognitive and behavioral consequences of attitude importance and certainty: a new approach to testing the common-factor hypothesis. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 39(2):118-41
122. Visser PS, Mirabile RR. 2004. Attitudes in the social context: the impact of social network composition on individual-level attitude strength. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 87(6):779-95
123. Westerwick A, Kleinman SB, Knobloch-Westerwick S. 2013. Turn a blind eye if you care: impacts of attitude consistency, importance, and credibility on seeking of political information and implications for attitudes. J. Commun. 63(3):432-53
124. Ziegler R, Schlett C. 2016. An attitude strength and self-perception framework regarding the bi-directional relationship of job satisfaction with extra-role and in-role behavior: the doubly moderating role of work certainty. Front. Psychol. 7:1-17
125. Zuwerink Jacks J, Cameron KA. 2003. Strategies for resisting persuasion. Basic Appl. Soc. Psychol. 25(2):145-61
126. Zuwerink Jacks J,Devine PG. 1996. Attitude importance and resistance to persuasion: It's not just the thought that counts. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 70(5):931-44
127. Zuwerink Jacks J, Devine PG. 2000. Attitude importance, forewarning of message content, and resistance to persuasion. Basic Appl. Soc. Psychol. 22(1):19-29
128. Zuwerink Jacks J, Lancaster LC. 2015. Fit for persuasion: the effects of nonverbal delivery style, message framing, and gender on message effectiveness. J. Appl. Soc. Psychol. 45:203-13