Ajzen 20 Attitude 20 Theory 20 Ann Rev Psy 202001

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.
net/publication/12181656
Nature and Operation of Attitudes
Article in Annual Review of Psychology · February 2001

DOI: 10.1146/annurev.psych.52.1.27 · Source: PubMed
CITATIONS READS
4,045 28,616
1 author:
Icek Ajzen
University of Massachusetts Amherst
170 PUBLICATIONS 217,581 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
All content following this page was uploaded by Icek Ajzen on 13 June 2014.
The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

P1: FXY
December 12, 2000 12:44 Annual Reviews AR120-02
Annu. Rev. Psychol. 2001. 52:27–58

Copyright c 2001 by Annual Reviews. All rights reserved
NATURE AND OPERATION OF ATTITUDES

Icek Ajzen
Department of Psychology, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, Massachusetts 01003;
e-mail: [email protected]
Annu. Rev. Psychol. 2001.52:27-58. Downloaded from arjournals.annualreviews.org
Key Words belief, evaluation, attitude strength, accessibility,

by UNIV. OF ILLINOIS AT CHICAGO on 08/24/05. For personal use only.
attitude-behavior relation
■ Abstract This survey of attitude theory and research published between 1996
and 1999 covers the conceptualization of attitude, attitude formation and activation,
attitude structure and function, and the attitude-behavior relation. Research regarding
the expectancy-value model of attitude is considered, as are the roles of accessible
beliefs and affective versus cognitive processes in the formation of attitudes. The
survey reviews research on attitude strength and its antecedents and consequences,
and covers progress made on the assessment of attitudinal ambivalence and its effects.
Also considered is research on automatic attitude activation, attitude functions, and
the relation of attitudes to broader values. A large number of studies dealt with the
relation between attitudes and behavior. Research revealing additional moderators of
this relation is reviewed, as are theory and research on the link between intentions
and actions. Most work in this context was devoted to issues raised by the theories
of reasoned action and planned behavior. The present review highlights the nature of
perceived behavioral control, the relative importance of attitudes and subjective norms,
the utility of adding more predictors, and the roles of prior behavior and habit.
CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
CONCEPTUALIZATION OF ATTITUDE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
Attitude Objects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
Evaluation Versus Affect . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
ATTITUDE FORMATION AND ACTIVATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
The Expectancy-Value Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
Automatic Attitude Activation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
Affect Versus Cognition as Antecedents of Evaluation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
Accessibility of Beliefs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
ATTITUDE STRENGTH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
Consequences of Attitude Strength . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
ATTITUDINAL AMBIVALENCE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
Consequences of Ambivalence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
FUNCTIONS OF ATTITUDES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
PREDICTION OF BEHAVIOR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
0066-4308/01/0201-0027$14.00 27
P1: FXY
28 AJZEN
Moderators of Attitude-Behavior Consistency . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42

Theories of Reasoned Action and Planned Behavior . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
From Intentions to Actions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
CONCLUSIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
INTRODUCTION
The attitude construct continues to be a major focus of theory and research in

the social and behavioral sciences, as evidenced by the proliferation of articles,
chapters, and books on attitude-related topics published between 1996 and 1999,
the period covered in this review. To the relief of authors, the Annual Review
of Psychology now divides this burgeoning field into two separate chapters, one
surveying attitude change, persuasion, and social influence (Wood 2000), and this
chapter, intended to deal with most of the remaining topics: conceptualization of
attitudes, attitude formation and activation, attitude structure and function, and the
attitude-behavior relation. Space limitations confine this review to basic, theory-
oriented research, and to topics not covered in other Annual Review chapters, such
as biases in judgment and decision making (Mellers et al 1998, Johnson-Laird
1999), social cognition and social perception (Fiske 1993), mood and emotion
(Cacioppo & Gardner 1999), the self and self esteem (Demo 1989, Banaji &
Prentice 1994), and stereotypes and prejudice (Hilton & von Hippel 1996), as well
as intra- and inter-group attitudes (Levine & Moreland 1990, Pettigrew 1998). A
new collection of attitude scales in the political domain (Robinson et al 1999)
provides a useful discussion of available instruments.
CONCEPTUALIZATION OF ATTITUDE
There is general agreement that attitude represents a summary evaluation of a
psychological object captured in such attribute dimensions as good-bad, harmful-
beneficial, pleasant-unpleasant, and likable-dislikable (Ajzen & Fishbein 2000,
Eagly & Chaiken 1993, Petty et al 1997; an in-depth discussion of issues related
to evaluation can be found in Tesser & Martin 1996; see also Brendl & Higgins
1996). Recent neurological evidence suggests that evaluative judgments differ in
important ways from nonevaluative judgments. Crites & Cacioppo (1996; see
also Cacioppo et al 1996) asked respondents to categorize food items either as
positive versus nonpositive or as vegetable versus nonvegetable. Compared with
the late positive brain potential evoked by nonevaluative categorizations, evaluative
categorizations were found to evoke a potential that was relatively larger over wide
areas of the right than the left scalp regions. So fundamental and ubiquitous are
evaluative reactions to psychological objects that investigators have posited a need
to evaluate (Jarvis & Petty 1996, Petty & Jarvis 1996). Individuals are said to
differ in their chronic tendency to engage in evaluative responding. Jarvis & Petty
P1: FXY
ATTITUDES 29
(1996) developed a 16-item scale to measure this tendency, a scale shown to have
high internal consistency, a single-factor structure, high test-retest reliability, and
convergent and discriminant validity. Compared to respondents with low scores,
respondents high in the need to evaluate were found to be more likely to hold
attitudes toward various social and political issues and to list more evaluative
thoughts about unfamiliar paintings and about a typical day in their lives.
Attitude Objects
The idea that attitudes are dispositions to evaluate psychological objects would
seem to imply that we hold one, and only one, attitude toward any given object or
issue. Recent work, however, suggests that this may be too simplistic a concep-
tion. Thus, when attitudes change, the new attitude overrides but may not replace
the old attitude (Wilson et al 2000). According to this model of dual attitudes,
people can simultaneously hold two different attitudes toward a given object in the
same context, one attitude implicit or habitual, the other explicit. Motivation and
capacity are assumed to be required to retrieve the explicit attitude in favor of the
implicit evaluative response.
Depending on perspective, different evaluations of the same object in different
contexts can be considered evidence for multiple attitudes toward the same object,
or attitudes toward different psychological objects. One mechanism for the de-
velopment of different context-dependent attitudes has been found in the presence
of illusory correlations between a target’s behavior and the context in which the
behavior is observed (McConnell et al 1997). These investigators suggest that
some apparent discrepancies between attitudes and behavior may reflect the pres-
ence of multiple context–dependent attitudes toward social targets. In a similar
vein, respondents have been found to hold different attitudes with respect to high
and low relevance versions of the same attitudinal issue (Liberman & Chaiken
1996).
Evaluation Versus Affect

Reflected in Thurstone’s (1931) well-known definition of attitude as affect for or
against a psychological object, early theorists used the term affect in the sense in
which we now use the term attitude, i.e. to denote overall degree of favorability.
The current preference is to reserve the term affect for general moods (happiness,
sadness) and specific emotions (fear, anger, envy), states that contain degrees of va-
lence as well as arousal (Ajzen & Fishbein 2000, Giner-Sorolla 1999, Schwarz &
Clore 1996, Tesser & Martin 1996).
Bipolarity of Affect Somewhat beyond the scope of this review, an emerging res-
olution of the controversy regarding bipolarity of affect is worth noting. Findings
reported in the 1960s (e.g. Nowlis 1965) suggested that, contrary to intuition and
theory, positive moods and emotions may be orthogonal to their negative counter-
parts, and many investigators subsequently accepted the relative independence and
P1: FXY
30 AJZEN
separability of positive and negative affect (e.g. Cacioppo & Berntson 1994, Ito et al
1998a). In a persuasive reconceptualization and series of experiments, Feldman
Barrett & Russell (1998) and Russell & Carroll (1999) posed a serious challenge
to this view (see also Watson & Tellegen 1999). The apparent independence of
positive and negative affect is shown to be largely an artifact of the methodology
used in empirical investigations. When items are selected to be semantic bipo-
lar opposites of affective experience, to represent the full domain of positive and
negative terms, and to separate high and low levels of activation inherent in the
experience, strong negative correlations between positive and negative affect are
obtained.
ATTITUDE FORMATION AND ACTIVATION
The Expectancy-Value Model

Evaluation is known to be a fundamental aspect of any concept’s connotative
meaning (Osgood et al 1957). According to the most popular conceptualization of
attitude, the expectancy-value model (see Feather 1982, Fishbein 1963, Fishbein &
Ajzen 1975), this evaluative meaning arises spontaneously and inevitably as we
form beliefs about the object (see Ajzen & Fishbein 2000). Each belief associates
the object with a certain attribute, and a person’s overall attitude toward an object
is determined by the subjective values of the object’s attributes in interaction with
the strength of the associations. Although people can form many different beliefs
about an object, it is assumed that only beliefs that are readily accessible in memory
influence attitude at any given moment. A belief’s chronic accessibility tends to
increase as a function of the frequency with which the expectancy is activated and
the recency of its activation, as well as the belief’s importance (Higgins 1996, Olson
et al 1996). The expectancy-value model will serve as a conceptual framework for
the remaining sections of this review.
Critical Issues Despite, or perhaps because of, its popularity, the expectancy-
value model continues to draw critical attention. In a provocative article, Fishbein &
Middlestadt (1995) presented evidence that overall evaluations or attitudes are
indeed based on beliefs and their associated evaluations, and argued that when
noncognitive factors are sometimes found to have a direct effect on attitudes, this
is due to methodological artifacts. A torrent of replies has challenged this conclu-
sion, reaffirming the idea that beliefs are only one possible influence on attitudes
(Haugtvedt 1997, Miniard & Barone 1997, Priester & Fleming 1997, Schwarz
1997; but see Fishbein & Middlestadt 1997 for a rejoinder).
A recurrent issue regarding the expectancy-value model has to do with the rel-
ative importance of different beliefs as determinants of attitude. Assuming that
importance affects accessibility (see Higgins 1996), and hence that only impor-
tant beliefs are likely to be activated spontaneously, the expectancy-value model
P1: FXY
ATTITUDES 31
assigns equal weights to all belief-value products. Following up on a study by

Budd (1986), van der Pligt & de Vries (1998; see also van der Pligt et al 2000)
examined the role of belief importance in smoking attitudes and behavior. Stu-
dent smokers and nonsmokers expressed their attitudes toward smoking, rated the
likelihood and value of each of 15 potential consequences of smoking, and se-
lected the 3 consequences they considered most important. In comparison to an
expectancy-value index based on the 12 low-importance beliefs, an index based
on only the 3 most important beliefs correlated better with the direct semantic dif-
ferential measure of attitude toward smoking and with reported smoking behavior.
However, the 15 consequences of smoking included in the survey were selected by
the investigators and did not necessarily represent accessible beliefs. Consistent
with this reasoning, the authors noted that their measure of perceived importance
may have served primarily to identify the beliefs that were accessible for smokers
and nonsmokers. Indeed, follow-up research (van Harreveld et al 2000) showed
that beliefs judged to be important are more accessible in memory, as indicated by
lower response latencies.
Another concern regarding the expectancy-value model is that the assumed be-
lief × evaluation interaction may misrepresent the cognitive processes involved
in attitude formation. Thus, it has been proposed that beliefs and values may relate
independently to overall attitudes in a process termed double denial (Sjoeberg &
Montgomery 1999). To illustrate, a person with a strong negative attitude toward
drinking alcohol may deny (rate as highly unlikely) that drinking makes you happy,
yet at the same time assign a negative evaluation to “being happy.” When mul-
tiplied in accordance with the expectancy-value model, the product term implies
a relatively favorable attitude toward drinking alcohol, or at least a less negative
attitude than if the likelihood rating had been high. Sjoeberg & Montgomery
(1999) obtained data in support of this phenomenon, in an apparent contradic-
tion of the expectancy-value model. However, according to the expectancy-value
model, when attributes come to be linked to an object in the process of belief
formation, the pre-existing attribute evaluations are associated with the object,
producing an overall positive or negative attitude. It is thus important to assess
attribute evaluations independent of their link to the attitude object. In the above
example, a person who rates “being happy” as negative most likely does so in the
context of drinking alcohol, i.e. the person asserts that being happy as a result of
drinking alcohol is undesirable, not that being happy is bad in general.
Although not dealing directly with attitudes, an interesting perspective on the
interaction between expectancies and values has arisen out of theorizing on regula-
tory focus (Higgins 1987). Shah & Higgins (1997) either measured or manipulated
promotion and prevention focus, and predicted task performance or decisions from
expectancies and values associated with potential outcomes of goal attainment.
Positive expectancies and values generally had the anticipated effects, increasing
goal commitment. However, after entering the expectancy and value measures
as main effects, the added contribution of the interaction varied as a function of
regulatory focus: The interaction term had a significant positive coefficient for
P1: FXY
32 AJZEN
participants with a promotion focus, but a negative coefficient for participants

with a prevention focus.
Automatic Attitude Activation

As noted earlier, the expectancy-value model assumes that an object’s evalua-
tive meaning arises spontaneously, without conscious effort. Evidence indicating
that evaluative reactions tend to be immediate and fast, and can occur outside of
awareness, has been accumulating rapidly. Much of this research relies on the
sequential evaluative priming paradigm in which stimuli with known positive or
negative valence, usually words, serve as priming events. Presented at subliminal
exposure times, these primes are found to influence the speed at which subsequent
target stimuli, usually adjectives, are judged to be good or bad. Judgments are
faster when the valence of the target adjective matches the valence of the prime
(see, however, Glaser & Banaji 1999 for a reversal of this effect in the case of
evaluatively extreme primes).
Initial research tried to demonstrate that attitudes can be automatically acti-
vated, and—more importantly—to establish the conditions necessary for auto-
matic attitude activation. Thus, it was first proposed that attitudes are activated
automatically only by stimuli that elicit a quick, conscious evaluative response
(Fazio et al 1986). Low-conscious evaluation latencies were assumed to indicate
the presence of a strong, chronically accessible attitude amenable to automatic
activation. Subsequent research, however, showed that preconscious automatic
attitude activation is independent of attitude strength, i.e. of the speed at which
conscious evaluations occur (Bargh et al 1992). In fact, it is now clear that au-
tomatic attitude activation occurs even in the absence of an explicit goal to make
evaluative judgments (Bargh et al 1996, Bargh & Chartrand 1999). In the first
of three experiments, explicit evaluation of the target adjectives was removed by
asking participants to simply pronounce the target stimuli as quickly as possible.
Although nonevaluative, these responses were found to be faster when prime and
target valences were congruent rather than incongruent. In the remaining two
experiments, the need to obtain an initial evaluation of the priming stimuli was
obviated by using normative data from previous research. Shorter pronunciation
latencies for target adjectives with prime-congruent valences again confirmed the
automatic attitude activation effect. Moreover, the experiments demonstrated au-
tomatic attitude activation not only for primes with strongly positive and negative
valences, but also for primes with mildly positive and negative valences. Simi-
larly, using drawings of animate and inanimate objects instead of words as primes,
Giner-Sorolla et al (1999) again extended the generality of the automatic evalu-
ation effect to moderately valenced priming stimuli, and to situations that do not
pose evaluation as an explicit processing goal.
If automatic attitude activation seems to be unaffected by degree of accessibility,
a recent series of experiments suggests that it may be moderated by familiarity
with the attitude object (Ottati et al, submitted for publication). Using a variation
P1: FXY
ATTITUDES 33
of the sequential priming paradigm, it was shown that automatic attitude activation
is produced by primes representing well-known positive or negative person types
(e.g. genius, bully) but not by primes representing newly acquired attitude objects
(fictitious persons who performed positive or negative behaviors).
The finding that attitudes are activated automatically has led investigators to
propose that response latencies be used to obtain measures of attitude that are free
of reactive effects, especially when trying to assess racial attitudes or attitudes
toward other socially sensitive issues. Ingenious methods have been developed to
take advantage of reaction times to relevant stimuli, and evidence for the validity
of these methods is becoming available (see Fazio et al 1995, Greenwald & Banaji
1995, Greenwald et al 1998).
Affect Versus Cognition as Antecedents of Evaluation

Inherent in the expectancy-value model of attitude is the assumption that evaluative
judgments are the result of cognitive processes: associations between the attitude
object and valued attributes. Some theorists have challenged this assumption,
proposing that evaluations may also be controlled by affective processes. In fact,
the affective primacy hypothesis (Zajonc 1980) assigns precedence to affect over
cognition.
Affective Primacy It is well established that repeated exposure to novel stimuli

tends to increase linking for those stimuli even—and especially—when participants
are unaware of having been exposed (see Bornstein 1989 for a review). A recent
attempt to validate the affective basis of evaluative judgments pitted the affective
primacy hypothesis against Schwarz & Clore’s (1983) feelings-as-information
model (Winkielman et al 1997). Participants evaluated Chinese ideographs fol-
lowing subliminal exposure to positive, negative, or neutral affect primes. Happy
and angry faces served as positive and negative primes, respectively, whereas poly-
gons or neutral faces served as neutral primes. The feelings-as-information model
assumes that positive or negative feelings elicited by the primes are misattributed
to the neutral ideographs, thus producing an affective priming effect. However,
participants were also explicitly induced to expect feeling positively or negatively
(or were given no such expectation) by either telling them of the subliminal primes
(in one experiment) or by playing new-age background music (in a second experi-
ment). This affective expectation manipulation was intended to give participants a
situational cue to which they could misattribute their positive or negative feelings.
The results were incompatible with the feelings-as-information model. Although
subliminal exposure to happy or angry faces produced the usual affective priming
effect on evaluations, this effect was not moderated by the affective expectation.
Affective priming thus seems to be unaffected by, and independent of, such higher-
order cognitive processes as attributional judgments. Of course, this does not rule
out the operation of lower-level cognitive processes that may have preceded the
evaluative judgments. In fact, the question as to whether evaluation is preceded
P1: FXY
34 AJZEN
by low-level affective processes, low-level cognitive processes, or both may not

be amenable to resolution by currently available means.
Joint Effects of Affect and Cognition An alternative and by far more popular
position is based on the multi-component view of attitude and assumes that eval-
uations are influenced by cognition as well as affect (see Eagly & Chaiken 1993,
van der Pligt et al 1998). Recent research suggests that the affective and cognitive
components of attitude may differ in accessibility (Verplanken et al 1998b). Par-
ticipants were asked to indicate, on a set of evaluative semantic differential scales,
how they thought versus how they felt about attitude objects in two different do-
mains: brand names and countries. Response times were significantly shorter for
affective judgments, suggesting that the affective aspects underlying attitudes are
more easily accessible in memory.

Consistent with this finding, when beliefs and feelings regarding an object are
of opposite valence, feelings tend to predominate (Lavine et al 1998b). Using
national survey data, the investigators measured the feelings (e.g. proud, angry)
engendered by candidates in four recent U.S. presidential elections as well as their
beliefs about the candidates’ personal characteristics (e.g. knowledgeable, dishon-
est). The participants were then divided into those whose affect and cognition
scores were evaluatively consistent (univalent) and those who reported oppositely
valenced beliefs and feelings (ambivalent). A univalent pattern of affect and cog-
nition permitted better prediction of overall attitudes toward the candidates and of
reported voting choice. Of greater interest, when affect and cognition were consis-
tent with each other, both contributed strongly and about equally to the prediction.
However, among the ambivalent respondents, feelings toward the candidates were
found to be the primary determinants of attitudes and voting behavior. In a related
study (Simons & Carey 1998), experience with drug and alcohol use was found to
influence the relative importance of the cognitive and affective bases of attitudes:
The importance of affect as a predictor of attitudes increased with experience.
In a chapter describing their recent research program, Haddock & Zanna (2000)
summarized the results of several studies that provide support for the joint effects
of beliefs and feelings on evaluations. Of more interest, they also show that in-
dividuals differ in their tendency to base their attitudes on cognition or affect.
After developing a measure to capture individual differences in the tendency to
rely on thoughts or feelings, the investigators administered the instrument together
with a survey of beliefs, feelings, and attitudes with respect to several social is-
sues (Haddock & Zanna 1998). Regression analyses showed the expected results:
The attitudes of individuals identified as “thinkers” were predicted by their beliefs
about the attitude objects, but not by their feelings, and the reverse was true for
individuals identified as “feelers.”
In a parallel manner, attitudes toward some objects rely more on affect than
cognition, whereas attitudes toward other objects rely more on cognition than affect
(Kempf 1999). Participants in this study were asked to try one of two computer
software products, a computer game or a grammar checking program, and to
P1: FXY
ATTITUDES 35
report their feelings and beliefs with respect to the product. Evaluation of the
trial experience with the hedonic product (the computer game) was found to be
based largely on feelings, whereas for the functional product (grammar checking
program) the evaluation was determined primarily by beliefs about brand attributes.
In sum, it has been found that individuals differ in their reliance on cognition
versus affect as determinants of attitude, and that the two components also take on
different degrees of importance for different attitude objects.
Negativity Bias Whether cognitive or affective in nature, it is well known that

negative information tends to have a greater impact on overall evaluations than
comparably extreme positive information. The negativity bias was again demon-
strated by research regarding the effects of positive and negative information on

evaluations of political candidates (Klein 1996) and sponsors of political adver-
tising (Matthews & Dietz-Uhler 1998), and by research showing greater cognitive
activity and better memory for negative as compared to positive stimulus words
(Ohira et al 1998). Research that assessed event-related brain potentials while
participants viewed positive, negative, and neutral pictures (Ito et al 1998b) has
shown that this negativity bias occurs very early in the processing of information,
as the information is being categorized into positive or negative valence classes.
Accessibility of Beliefs
According to the expectancy-value model, chronically accessible beliefs provide
the foundation for our current, relatively stable attitudes, but various contextual
factors can temporarily make certain beliefs more readily accessible. Depending
on the valence of these beliefs, the prevailing attitude could shift in either a positive
or negative direction (Ajzen & Sexton 1999). A systematic approach to the relation
between accessibility of beliefs and its effects on attitudes is provided by attitude
representation theory (Lord & Lepper 1999; see also Sia et al 1999), which makes
a strong case for the dependence of evaluation on the subjective representation
of the attitude object. An experimental test of the theory showed that measured
attitudes toward such social categories as politicians, homosexuals, and rock musi-
cians remain relatively stable over time to the extent that the same representations
(exemplars) of the category are accessed on different occasions (Sia et al 1997).
In a somewhat related approach, the goal compatibility framework (Markman &
Brendl 2000) suggests that people evaluate objects in relation to currently active
goals.
Perhaps the simplest way to influence people’s accessible beliefs in a positive
or negative direction is to ask them to think about positive or negative aspects
of the attitude object, a directed thinking task that can at least temporarily im-
pact even such a fundamental aspect of personality as self-esteem (McGuire &
McGuire 1996). College students asked to list desirable characteristics they pos-
sess or undesirable characteristics they do not possess expressed more favorable
attitudes toward themselves than did students who were asked to list undesirable
P1: FXY
36 AJZEN
characteristics they possess or desirable characteristics they do not possess. A

related experiment (Ratcliff et al 1999) showed that directed thinking about the
actions people could take to make studying enjoyable increased intentions to spend
time studying, but directed thinking about reasons why people should find studying
enjoyable did not. Other research (Levine et al 1996) also supported the proposi-
tion that thinking about the reasons for holding an attitude can distort attitudinal
judgments and disrupt the attitude-behavior relation.
A study by Waenke et al (1996) similarly illustrated that activation of beliefs
can have paradoxical effects on attitudes. Participants generated either three or
seven arguments in favor of or opposed to the use of public transportation, and
then expressed their attitudes toward this issue. The elicitation of pro versus
con beliefs produced a corresponding difference in attitudes when three beliefs

were generated (easy task) but no significant difference when seven beliefs were
generated (difficult task). Readers of the same arguments, however, displayed
the intuitively expected pattern: Their attitudes were affected more by seven than
by three arguments. It appears that the attitudes expressed by participants who
generated the arguments took account of the subjective difficulty of the task.
According to temporal construal theory (Liberman & Trope 1998), a goal’s
desirability is represented at an abstract level, whereas the likelihood that the
goal will be attained is construed at a more concrete level. Furthermore, the
value of the abstract aspects of the goal, i.e. the goal’s desirability, increases
with temporal distance from the goal, whereas the value of the concrete aspects,
i.e. its probability, decreases with temporal distance. In a series of experiments,
Liberman and Trope found that people give weight to a goal’s positive aspects (its
desirability) when making decisions for the long term, and to the goal’s negative as-
pects (i.e. its difficulty) when making decisions for the short term. These findings
imply that positive beliefs about the goal are more readily accessible in long-term
decisions, whereas negative beliefs predominate in short-term decisions.
Studying impression formation, Wojciszke et al (1998) distinguished between
morality- and competence-related beliefs. Personality traits related to morality
(e.g. sincere, generous) were found to be more chronically accessible than traits re-
lated to competence (e.g. intelligent, foresighted): Many more morality than com-
petence traits were emitted spontaneously as being important in others. Consistent
with this finding, global impressions of real persons were better predicted from
beliefs about morality-related traits than from beliefs about competence-related
traits, and attitudes toward fictitious persons were based more on the morality than
on the competence of their behaviors.
An interesting finding regarding the accessibility of beliefs comes from re-
search on the effects of alcohol on behavioral decisions. According to the alco-
hol myopia hypothesis (Steele & Josephs 1990), alcohol consumption decreases
cognitive capacity so that intoxicated individuals are likely to attend to the most
salient cues in a situation. In laboratory and field experiments (MacDonald et al
1996), intoxicated participants indicated a greater likelihood of engaging in un-
protected sex than did sober participants and, in support of the alcohol myopia
P1: FXY
ATTITUDES 37
hypothesis, they were more likely to endorse beliefs that provide justifications for
unprotected sex.
In short, personal and contextual factors combine to increase or decrease the
accessibility of different kinds of beliefs, with potentially important ramifications
for evaluative judgments and behavioral decisions.
ATTITUDE STRENGTH
Strong attitudes are thought to have a number of interesting qualities. They are
said to be relatively stable over time, to be resistant to persuasion, and to predict

manifest behavior. Visser & Krosnick (1998) documented changes in attitude

strength over the life cycle. Contrary to the common belief that cognitive flexibil-
ity and readiness to change one’s attitudes decline with age, the results of several
studies demonstrated that susceptibility to attitude change declines from early to
middle adulthood and then increases again in late adulthood. Similarly, rated im-
portance of attitudinal issues, certainty, and perceived quantity of attitude-relevant
knowledge were greater in middle adulthood than during early or late adulthood.
However, these various indexes of attitude strength were found to correlate dif-
ferentially with education, gender, and race, challenging the notion that attitude
strength is a unitary construct.
High personal relevance of information on which an attitude is based has been
found to increase its strength (Kokkinaki & Lunt 1999), as measured by response
times, i.e. accessibility. College students were exposed to an advertisement for an
unfamiliar product under high and low personal relevance conditions, and subse-
quently their brand attitudes, as well as the response latencies of these attitudes,
were assessed. In line with dual-mode processing models, high personal relevance,
or involvement, was expected to increase information processing and, consistent
with predictions, attitudes formed under conditions of high involvement were
found to be significantly more accessible compared to those formed under low
levels of involvement.
Consequences of Attitude Strength

Using a sequential priming paradigm, Bassili & Roy (1998) examined the effects
of attitude strength on the representation of attitudes in memory. Participants either
first evaluated a policy and then thought of one of its consequences, or they first
thought of a possible consequence and then evaluated the policy. In general, it took
participants longer to think of a consequence of a policy than to evaluate it, sug-
gesting that evaluations are relatively automatic, whereas belief emission requires
some cognitive effort. Results further showed that thinking of a consequence of a
policy speeded up its subsequent evaluation, regardless of whether the participant
held a strong or weak attitude about the policy. Evaluating the policy speeded up
thinking of one of its consequences for strong attitudes but not for weak ones.
P1: FXY
38 AJZEN
Strong attitudes are, among other things, expected to be relatively resistant to

change. Drawing a distinction between meta-attitudinal and operative indexes of
attitude strength, Bassili (1996) reported the results of two studies concerning re-
sistance to attitude change with respect to three social issues: employment quotas
for women, laws regulating pornography, and laws prohibiting hateful expres-
sions. Meta-attitudinal measures of strength were of a subjective nature, asking
participants in the first study to judge the certainty, importance, and strength of
their attitudes, as well as their knowledge, attention, and frequency of thought
concerning the issues. The operative, and relatively more objective, indexes were
measures of attitude extremity, ambivalence, and response latency. In the second
study, participants were also asked to provide subjective judgments of these oper-
ative aspects of their attitudes. Resistance to change was, in both studies, assessed
by observing reactions to a counter argument, and in the second study also by sta-
bility over a two-week period. The results of multiple regression analyses showed
that resistance to change was affected only by the operative measures of attitude
strength; the meta-attitudinal measures did not account for unique variance.
A possible clue to the inferiority of the subjective or meta-attitudinal measures
of attitude strength can be found in a study by Haddock et al (1996), who showed
that the subjective experience of attitude strength is quite malleable. After express-
ing their attitudes toward doctor-assisted suicide, college students were asked to
list either three or seven arguments pro or counter their own positions. This was
followed by several questions designed to assess subjective attitude strength. As
might be expected, participants found it easier to generate three as compared to
seven arguments. They then apparently used the ease of argument generation to
infer the strength of their attitudes. Attitude importance, intensity, and certainty
were judged greater when generation of arguments in favor of one’s position was
relatively easy (three pro arguments) and when generation of arguments opposed to
one’s position was relatively difficult (seven con arguments). Interestingly, these
findings were obtained only when subjective attitude strength was assessed in terms
of importance, intensity, and certainty, not when attitude strength was measured in
terms of frequency of thinking or knowledge concerning the issue. Furthermore,
in a subsequent experiment, ease of argument retrieval was found to have no effect
on subjective certainty for individuals with relatively extreme attitudes (Haddock
et al 1999). These findings again support the relative independence of different
aspects of attitude strength.
A similar conclusion emerged in another series of studies concerning the effects
of attitude strength on temporal stability (Prislin 1996). Undergraduates expressed
their attitudes toward affirmative action, euthanasia, and legalized abortion on two
occasions. Different dimensions of attitude strength were found to predict the sta-
bility of these different attitudes. Generalized attitude strength ( judged certainty,
importance, vested interest, frequency of thought, experience, knowledge) moder-
ated the stability of attitudes toward affirmative action, with strong attitudes being
more stable than weak attitudes; internal consistency of the attitude (evaluative-
cognitive and evaluative-affective consistencies) moderated stability of attitudes
P1: FXY
ATTITUDES 39
toward euthanasia; and attitude extremity affected the stability of attitudes toward
legalized abortion.
Lavine et al (1998a) showed that attitude strength moderates the susceptibility
of attitudes to item context effects in surveys, with relatively weak attitudes being
more susceptible to context effects than relatively strong attitudes. However, this
finding was obtained only with a multi-item aggregate measure of attitude strength
(containing measures of importance, certainty, extremity, frequency of thought,
intensity, and ambivalence), not when a single item was used to assess attitude
strength.
The strength of evaluative reactions has proven to be an important characteristic
of attitudes, but its multidimensional nature is proving to be a serious obstacle to
progress. Attitude strength has been operationalized in different ways, including

importance of the issue, extremity of the attitude, its stability over time, certainty
in one’s position, vested interest, involvement, affective-cognitive consistency,
knowledge about the issue, frequency of thinking about it, and—consistent with
Fazio’s (Fazio et al 1986, Fazio & Towles-Schwen 1999) theorizing—latency of
conscious, deliberate responses to attitudinal inquiries (see Krosnick et al 1993,
Petty & Krosnick 1995). Yet, research continues to reveal only weak relations
among these dimensions of attitude strength, and different measures tend to pro-
duce conflicting research findings.
ATTITUDINAL AMBIVALENCE
Generally speaking, ambivalence reflects the co-existence of positive and negative

dispositions toward an attitude object. This ambivalence can result from simulta-
neously accessible conflicting beliefs within the cognitive component (McGregor
et al 1999), or from a conflict between cognition and affect (for discussions, see
Eagly & Chaiken 1993, Maio et al 2000, McGregor et al 1999). Recent attempts to
quantify this property of attitudes have focused on ambivalence within the cogni-
tive component. By differentially weighting the strength of conflicting beliefs, it is
possible to derive varying formulas for the computation of ambivalence. Building
on earlier work (Thompson et al 1995), Priester & Petty (1996) reviewed and then
evaluated the relative merits of different operational definitions by comparing their
ability to predict the subjective experience of ambivalence. Following a sophisti-
cated analysis, they presented data to support the superiority of a gradual threshold
model. According to this model, ambivalence increases as a negatively accelerat-
ing function of the number of conflicting beliefs, and decreases with the number of
dominant reactions (i.e. the more frequent reactions, whether positive or negative)
up to a threshold defined by a certain level of conflicting reactions. Despite its
unique features, however, the proposed formulation was found to correlate quite
highly with other quantifications of ambivalence, and although it was superior
to other indices in some respects, the proposed measure accounted for only a
moderate amount of variance in the subjective ambivalence criterion.
P1: FXY
40 AJZEN
Consequences of Ambivalence
Holding ambivalent attitudes has been shown to affect judgments and behavior
in profound ways. Thus, although equal in stability over time, relatively nonam-
bivalent attitudes toward eating a low-fat diet were found to be more predictive of
subsequent intentions and behavior than ambivalent attitudes, and they were also
more resistant to a persuasive communication (Armitage & Conner 2000b; see also
Conner et al 1998b). However, this may hold only for attitudes toward familiar
objects or issues. Arguing that ambivalence decreases people’s confidence in their
attitudes toward behaviors involving the attitude object, Jonas et al (1997) pos-
tulated that ambivalent attitudes are associated with more systematic information
processing and hence, predict intentions better than nonambivalent attitudes. Two
experiments confirmed these expectations: Attitudes of participants provided with

evaluatively inconsistent information about fictional shampoos predicted buying
intentions better than did attitudes based on evaluatively consistent information.
Similarly, people with ambivalent attitudes toward a minority group were found to
be more likely to systematically process information about the group (Maio et al
1996) and, in comparison to individuals with less ambivalent attitudes, their reac-
tions toward the group reflected more readily a mood-induced priming of positive
and negative feelings (Bell & Esses 1997).
Ambivalence is a dominant theme in theorizing about racial, ethnic, and gender-
related prejudice (Fiske & Glick 1995, Gaertner & Dovidio 1986). Drawing on
this work, MacDonald & Zanna (1998) reported that men who exhibit ambiva-
lent attitudes toward feminists tend to rate them positively on the dimension of
admiration but negatively on the dimension of affection. Priming respondents
with related positive (agentic) or negative interpersonal qualities had little impact
on nonambivalent respondents but it had a significant effect on the attitudes and
hiring preferences of ambivalent respondents. After reading a résumé of a femi-
nist applicant, ambivalent participants who were positively primed expressed more
liking for the applicant and greater intentions to hire her than did negatively primed
ambivalent participants.
Attitudinal ambivalence is emerging as a promising area of research with the
potential to throw light on attitude structure—within as well as between atti-
tude components—on the processing of attitude-relevant information, on attitude
change, and on the effect of attitudes on behavior.
FUNCTIONS OF ATTITUDES
In the broadest sense of functionality, attitudes facilitate adaptation to the envi-

ronment (Eagly & Chaiken 1998). Researchers continue their attempts to iden-
tify the functions served by attitudes and to investigate their role in the forma-
tion and consequences of attitudes (see Maio & Olson 1999 for a collection
of chapters on this topic). Among the functions recognized by most theorists
P1: FXY
ATTITUDES 41
are the value-expressive function of attitudes, the knowledge function, the ego-
defensive function, the social-adjustive function, and the utilitarian function
(see e.g. Murray et al 1996). The operation of some of these functions has been
investigated in recent studies.
In a laboratory experiment, Chen & Bargh (1999) demonstrated that positive
and negative evaluations serve to orient people toward approach and avoidance,
respectively. Participants exposed to positive words responded faster when in-
structed to pull a lever toward them than to push it away, whereas the reverse
pattern was observed for participants exposed to negative words.
Attitudinal function can be associated with positions on social issues
(cf. Reeder & Pryor 1999). Studying the functions of attitudes toward lifting
the ban on homosexuals in the military, Wyman & Snyder (1997) examined ego-
defensive beliefs (e.g. “Admitting gays to the military would create many more
problems of unwelcome sexual advances”) and value-expressive beliefs (e.g. “Ho-
mosexuality is wrong and this policy would be condoning it”). Respondents who
approved of lifting the ban rejected ego-defensive reasons for keeping it and they
endorsed value-expressive reasons to lift it. Conversely, respondents opposed to
lifting the ban endorsed ego-defensive and value-expressive reasons for keeping
the ban and rejected value-expressive reasons to lift it. Approaching this issue in
the context of the expectancy-value model, Demski & McGlynn (1999) showed
that attitudes toward parolees were based primarily on beliefs related to the instru-
mental or utilitarian function (i.e. practical concerns) rather than to beliefs related
to the value-expressive function (i.e. moral or symbolic concerns).
An attitude’s functional basis has been shown to influence the extent to which
people process function-consistent and function-inconsistent information (Petty &
Wegener 1998). College students preselected to be high or low in self-monitoring
tendency were exposed to a message that matched or mismatched the functional
basis of their attitudes toward common products: an image appeal for high self-
monitors and a quality appeal for low self-monitors, or vice versa. To examine
depth of information processing, the message contained either strong or weak
arguments. The strength of the arguments had a greater impact on attitudes toward
the products when they matched rather than mismatched the functional basis of
the attitude and, in a second study, this difference was especially pronounced for
individuals low in need for cognition.
Biasing Effects of Attitudes If attitudes serve a variety of functions for the

individual, they are likely to bias judgments and memory. It is generally hy-
pothesized that attitudes bias information processing and memory in favor of
attitude-consistent material. Thus, participants judged research consistent with
their attitudes toward homosexuality as more convincing than they judged re-
search inconsistent with their attitudes (Munro & Ditto 1997), and they classified
multiply categorizable objects in line with their most accessible attitudes (Smith
et al 1996). A meta-analysis of research on the attitude congeniality hypothesis
(Eagly et al 1999; see also Eagly 1998), however, failed to provide clear support.
P1: FXY
42 AJZEN
Results across studies were inconsistent, and the overall effect was weak. Attitude
structure and motivation to process attitude-relevant information were found to be
of possible significance in understanding the inconsistent findings. In line with
this suggestion, amount of prior knowledge combined with high fear of AIDS
was found to bias processing of information relevant to risk estimates, enabling
respondents to defend their existing views regarding the risk of contracting AIDS
(Biek et al 1996).
Attitudes and Values Favorable valences associated with such abstract concepts
as freedom and equality are known as values. Interest in the measurement and
function of values continues (see Seligman et al 1996). It has been suggested

that global values reflect cultural truisms, i.e. widely shared and rarely questioned
beliefs supported by a very limited cognitive foundation (Maio & Olson 1998).
Consistent with this assumption, asking participants to analyze their reasons for
holding such values as altruism and equality caused them to change their ratings
of these values. Moreover, this change was observed only when participants were
not provided with cognitive support for their values.
General values, once activated, are assumed to influence evaluations of specific
objects and events (Feather 1996). Indeed, broad values, as assessed by Schwartz’s
(1992) survey instrument, have been found to be related to food preferences in
different contexts (Feather et al 1998). Similarly, the values of security through
order, humanistic and expressive concerns, and religiosity and personal restraint
are related to liberal versus conservative attitudes (Braithwaite 1998; see also
Braithwaite 1997), and values of communalism and the work ethic predict attitudes
toward welfare (P Kulesa & AH Eagly, unpublished). On a somewhat narrower
scale, attitudes toward fat people were found to be linked to strong value placed on
responsibility for one’s actions in the United States, but not in Mexico (Crandall &
Martinez 1996).
The functional approach to attitudes has so far held out more promise than it has
been able to deliver. Attempts to link the functional basis of attitudes to processing
of function-relevant information may help to integrate work on attitudinal functions
with other theory and research on attitude formation and change.
PREDICTION OF BEHAVIOR
The ability of attitudes to predict behavioral intentions and overt behavior con-
tinues to be a major focus of theory and research. By far the greatest number of
publications on a single topic were concerned with this issue.
Moderators of Attitude-Behavior Consistency

Several studies continued to explore the role of moderating variables. Opera-
tionalizing attitude embeddedness as the number of free associations respondents
P1: FXY
ATTITUDES 43
produced in relation to an issue, Prislin & Ouellette (1996) found that highly
embedded attitudes toward preservation of the environment were more strongly
related to an aggregate measure of behavioral intentions than were low-embedded
attitudes. Also dealing with environmental issues, Schultz & Oskamp (1996) de-
termined that the relation between concern about the environment and recycling
behavior increased, as expected, to the extent that the behavior required effort on the
part of the participant. Others have investigated the effects on the attitude-behavior
relation of prior experience and thought (Millar & Millar 1998), cognitive load
and positive mood (Blessum et al 1998), direct and indirect experience (Millar &
Millar 1996), and the accessibility of alternative actions (Posavac et al 1997).
Returning to a theme of the 1970s, several studies dealt with the moderating
effect of involvement. In one experiment (Kokkinaki & Lunt 1997), involvement

as well as response latency (accessibility) were found to increase the impact of atti-
tudes on product choices. Involvement also took central stage in an exchange about
the role of vested interest in political behavior (Crano 1997a,b; Sears 1997). Con-
trary to earlier research that reported limited impact of vested interest on political
attitudes and actions, Crano (1997b) presented data to show that vested interest—
although uncorrelated with attitude valence—does affect the strength of the relation
between attitudes and behavior. In response, Sears (1997) contended that the mod-
erating effects of vested interest tend to be relatively small and restricted largely to
the daily lives of college students. According to Sears, symbolic aspects of an atti-
tude (ideology and values evoked by the attitude object) take on greater significance
in the public arena where they overshadow the impact of narrow self-interest.
Theories of Reasoned Action and Planned Behavior

Most studies concerned with the prediction of behavior from attitudinal vari-
ables were conducted in the framework of the theory of planned behavior (Ajzen
1991) and, to a lesser extent, its predecessor, the theory of reasoned action
(Ajzen & Fishbein 1980). According to the theory of planned behavior, people act
in accordance with their intentions and perceptions of control over the behavior,
while intentions in turn are influenced by attitudes toward the behavior, subjec-
tive norms, and perceptions of behavioral control. The cognitive foundations of
these factors are consistent with an expectancy-value formulation. Support for the
theory in general is summarized in a meta-analysis (Armitage & Conner 2000a)
and a review of the literature (Sutton 1998), and another review summarizes its
applications to health-related behavior (Conner & Sparks 1996).
Several studies have compared the predictive power of the theory of planned be-
havior with that of other models, including the information-motivation-behavioral-
skills model (de Witt et al 2000), the health belief model (Quine et al 1998), and the
integrated waste management model (Taylor & Todd 1997). Although designed
for application in specific domains, the alternative models were found to perform
not much better, and sometimes worse, than the general, content-free theory of
planned behavior.
P1: FXY
44 AJZEN
Applications Many investigators continue to demonstrate the applicability of

the theory in various content domains, including condom use (e.g. Albarracin
et al 1998, de Witt et al 2000, Jamner et al 1998, Reinecke et al 1996; see Sheeran &
Taylor 1999 for a meta-analysis) and other safe-sex behaviors (Boldero et al 1999,
de Vroome et al 2000), smoking (e.g. Norman et al 1999, Morrison et al 1996), get-
ting hormone replacement therapy (Quine & Rubin 1997), adhering to a medication
regimen (Conner et al 1998a), drinking alcohol (Morrison et al 1996, Trafimow
1996), using illegal substances (Conner et al 1998b, Conner & McMillan 1999),
eating low-fat food (e.g. Armitage & Conner 1999a, Paisley & Sparks 1998),
engaging in physical activity (e.g. Courneya et al 1999b, Trafimow & Trafimow
1998), choosing a career (Vincent et al 1998), playing basketball (Arnscheid &
Schomers 1996), wearing a safety helmet (Quine et al 1998), using dental floss
(Rise et al 1998), exposing oneself to sunlight (Hillhouse et al 1997), and com-

posting (Kaiser et al 1999). By and large, these studies have found support for
the theory, and little can be gained at this point by further demonstrations of the
theory’s applicability to particular domains.
Perceived Behavioral Control Going beyond the demonstration of applicabil-

ity, several studies have pursued a distinction between perceived controllability
(whether people believe that they have volitional control over performance of a
behavior) and self-efficacy, conceptualized as the degree of anticipated difficulty
in performing a behavior (see Bandura 1997 for a comprehensive discussion of
self-efficacy). Factor analyses of items designed to tap these two constructs re-
vealed the expected factors in the domains of eating behavior (Armitage & Conner
1999a,b; Sparks et al 1997) and academic achievement (Manstead & van Eekelen
1998), but only perceived difficulty—not perceived controllability—added signif-
icantly to the prediction of intentions and behavior (Armitage & Conner 1999b,
Manstead & van Eekelen 1998, Sparks et al 1997). In a somewhat related study,
Trafimow & Duran (1998) validated the distinction between attitude and perceived
behavioral control.
Attitudes Versus Norms Another issue has to do with the relative contributions
of attitudes and subjective norms to the prediction of intentions. Relying on
within-subjects analyses across 30 different behaviors, Trafimow & Finlay (1996;
see also Finlay et al 1997, 1999) confirmed that individuals differ in the relative
weights they place on attitudes and subjective norms, and that the weights of
these predictors also vary across behaviors. At the group level, workers’ turnover
intentions were, as might be expected, more under the influence of subjective
norms in a collectivist culture (Japan) than in an individualistic culture (Britain)
(Abrams et al 1998). Similarly, the intentions of general medical practitioners to
refer Asian patients to mental health services were more under control of subjective
norms, whereas their intentions to refer non-Asian patients were more under the
control of attitudinal considerations (Conner & Heywood-Everett 1998). In an
experimental analogue, Ybarra & Trafimow (1998) primed the accessibility of
P1: FXY
ATTITUDES 45
either the private or the collective self. Intentions to use condoms during sexual
intercourse were more under the control of attitudes in the former condition and
more under control of subjective norms in the latter. Similarly, intentions to avoid
exposure to the sun were influenced by the perceived norms of a reference group
among respondents who strongly identified with the group, whereas among low
identifiers, personal attitudes were a better predictor (Terry & Hogg 1996).
In a study on the effects of mood (Armitage et al 1999) it was found that attitudes
influenced intentions to use condoms and to eat low-fat foods after induction of a
negative mood, whereas subjective norms influenced these behaviors in a positive
mood condition. Intentions to eat sweets showed a consistent pattern of gender
differences: women’s intentions were under the influence of both attitudes and
subjective norms, whereas only attitudes significantly predicted the intentions

of men (Grogan et al 1997). Finally, the readiness of managers to undertake

benchmarking in their organization was influenced by their attitudes toward this
behavior, but only if they had past experience with it. Inexperienced managers
were influenced by their normative beliefs concerning the expectations of others
in the organization (Hill et al 1996).
Past research has often reported strong correlations between attitudes and sub-
jective norms. The differential patterns of impact on intentions and behavior docu-
mented in recent investigations tend to validate the conceptual distinction between
attitudinal and normative considerations.
Sufficiency Many studies challenge the assumption that the predictors in the the-
ory of planned behavior are sufficient to account for intentions and behavior. This
is done by including measures of additional variables in the prediction equation
and showing significant improvement in the prediction of intentions or behavior
(see Conner & Armitage 1998 for a review). Thus, several investigations showed
that the inclusion of a measure of self-identity can account for additional variance
in adherence to a low-fat diet (Armitage & Conner 1999a,b; Sparks & Guthrie
1998) and in marijuana use (Conner & McMillan 1999). Other studies demon-
strated improved prediction of environmentally relevant behavior with the addition
of personal or moral norms (Harland et al 1999; see also Kristiansen & Hotte 1996
and Manstead 2000 for a general discussion) and improved prediction of playing
the lottery and of precautionary sexual behavior with the addition of anticipated
regret (Richard et al 1998, Sheeran & Orbell 1999a; see also van der Pligt et al
1998). Measures of personality traits also improved prediction (Courneya et al
1999a), but the addition of various demographic variables did not (Albarracin
et al 1997). In general, however, even when improvements were found, for the most
part the improvements in prediction of intentions or behavior were relatively minor,
and their generalizability to other behavioral domains has yet to be demonstrated.
Past Behavior Related to the question of sufficiency is the role of past behavior.
Based on the assumption that frequent performance of a behavior leads to the
formation of a habit, and that habits can influence behavior independent of attitudes
P1: FXY
46 AJZEN
and intentions, theorists have proposed that frequency of past behavior be added
to our predictive models (e.g. Bentler & Speckart 1979, Triandis 1977; see also
Ouellette & Wood 1998). Several investigators have tested this idea by including
a measure of past conduct in the theory of planned behavior and have shown
that doing so can help account for a substantial portion of additional variance in
intentions or actual behavior (e.g. Conner et al 1999, O’Callaghan et al 1999). For
example, in a study of travel mode choice, prediction of car use from intentions
and perceptions of behavioral control was significantly improved by the addition
of past car use (Verplanken et al 1998a). More importantly, this study revealed
a significant interaction between intention and past behavior. When the relation
between intention and behavior was examined separately for respondents with
high, moderate, and low levels of past car use, it was significant only at the lowest
use level (see also Verplanken et al 1997). This finding suggests that intentions
may become largely irrelevant when a behavior has been performed many times,
i.e. when it has become habitual.
The prediction of studying intentions and behavior among college students was
also shown to benefit from the inclusion of a measure of past behavior (Leone et al
1999). This study found, however, that the contribution of past behavior declined
when perceived behavioral control was included in the prediction equation. Con-
sistent with this finding, perceived behavioral control was shown to mediate the
impact of similar past behaviors on acceptance of hormone replacement therapy
(Quine & Rubin 1997).
In short, the frequency with which a behavior has been performed in the past
tends to correlate well with later actions. Although there is some indication that
this relation may be mediated in part by perceived behavioral control, neither this
variable nor intentions completely explain the link between prior and later behavior.
Some investigators have interpreted these findings to mean that behavior has come
at least in part under the control of automatic processes or habits (e.g. Aarts &
Dijksterhuis 2000, Aarts et al 1998, Ouellette & Wood 1998). However, this is not
the only possible interpretation. Frequency of past behavioral performance may
capture and reflect a number of psychological processes or variables other than
habituation (see Ajzen & Fishbein 2000 for a discussion).
From Intentions to Actions

As in research on the attitude-behavior relation, investigators continued their search
for moderators of the intention-behavior relation. Studies showed that, as might
be expected, the temporal stability of intentions (Conner et al 2000, Sheeran et al
1999b) and of perceived behavioral control (Conner et al 2000) influence predictive
validity: Relatively stable intentions and perceptions of behavioral control were
better predictors of subsequent behavior. In a meta-analysis of research on intended
and actual condom use, shorter time intervals, older samples, and condom use
with steady versus casual partners were each found to be associated with stronger
correlations (Sheeran & Orbell 1998). Similarly, participants who had developed
P1: FXY
ATTITUDES 47
a schema relevant for dieting were found to exhibit stronger relations between
dieting intentions and behavior than did aschematic participants (Kendzierski &
Whitaker 1997); easily accessible voting intentions were better predictors of voting
choice than intentions with longer response latencies (Bassili 1995); and intentions
based on attitudes tended to predict performance of everyday behaviors better than
did intentions based on subjective norms (Sheeran et al 1999a).
Implementation Intentions In an impressive program of research, Gollwitzer

(1996, 1999) and his associates (Gollwitzer & Brandstaetter 1997, Gollwitzer &
Schaal 1998) have explored the cognitive processes that mediate the relation be-
tween intentions and behavior. A fundamental assumption in this work is that the
initiation of goal-directed responses becomes automatized following formation

of implementation intentions, i.e. intentions to perform a goal-directed behavior

when a specific context is encountered (see Gollwitzer & Schaal 1998). Spe-
cific plans of this kind are assumed to serve as powerful self-regulatory tools and
to facilitate implementation of intended behavior. In an empirical investigation
(Gollwitzer & Brandstaetter 1997) implementation intentions were found to facili-
tate the immediate initiation of goal-directed action when the intended opportunity
was encountered, and intentions to attain difficult goals were more likely to be
carried out when participants had formed implementation intentions. Similarly,
participants asked to formulate plans in the form of implementation intentions
were found to be better able to carry out their intentions to go on a healthier diet
(Verplanken & Faes 1999) and to take a vitamin C pill each day (Sheeran & Orbell
1999b). Clearly, intentions play an important role in guiding human action, but
recent research also reveals the complexities involved in translating intentions into
actual behavior.
CONCLUSIONS
Examination of the last four years of basic research on the nature and operation
of attitudes reveals continued interest in the major themes of the past. We can see
definite progress in some areas, but—as might be expected—no groundbreaking
developments in such a short period of time. The ubiquity and importance of
evaluative reactions were reaffirmed, with increased emphasis being placed on
automatic processes in attitude formation and activation. Evaluative reactions
have been shown to occur without awareness, even in the absence of conscious
intent to evaluate a stimulus object. The expectancy-value model of attitudes has
continued to provide a useful framework for research on attitude formation and
organization, but the debate over the cognitive versus affective basis of attitudes has
yet to be completely resolved. The research reviewed found that the contributions
of affect and cognition to overall evaluation vary with the attitude object and as
a function of individual differences. Research has continued to explore the role
of attitude strength, revealing again the problematic, multidimensional nature of
P1: FXY
48 AJZEN
this aspect of attitudes. Nevertheless, some interesting conclusions emerged: It

was reported that the strength of attitudes varies over the life cycle, with greatest
strength being displayed in mid-life. Strong attitudes were found to be associated
with more accessible beliefs and, when attitude strength was assessed by relatively
objective means, to be more resistant to change. New attempts to operationalize
attitudinal ambiguity and explore its implications were also reported.
The largest number of studies on any single topic had to do with the attitude-
behavior relation. Although it is now generally recognized that attitudes are rel-
evant for understanding and predicting social behavior, many questions remain.
Investigators continued to identify factors that moderate the effects of attitudes
and intentions on overt actions. Many other investigations applied or tested the
theories of reasoned action and planned behavior. There is now little doubt that
these theories can be usefully employed in various domains, but specific aspects
continue to draw critical attention. Research has shown that a distinction can be
drawn between perceived controllability and perceived difficulty of performing a
behavior (self-efficacy) and that the latter may be a more important antecedent of
intentions and actions; that the relative contributions of attitudes and subjective
norms vary across behaviors and subject populations; that other predictors may
have to be added to the theory; and that behavior may contain automatic, habitual
aspects not accounted for in models of reasoned action.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
I would like to thank Jim Averill for his helpful comments on an earlier draft.
Visit the Annual Reviews home page at www.AnnualReviews.org
LITERATURE CITED
Aarts H, Dijksterhuis A. 2000. Habits as Org. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 50:179–
knowledge structures: automaticity in goal- 211
directed behavior. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Ajzen I, Fishbein M. 1980. Understanding
78:53–63 Attitudes and Predicting Social Behavior.
Aarts H, Verplanken B, van Knippenberg A. Englewood-Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall
1998. Predicting behavior from actions in the Ajzen I, Fishbein M. 2000. Attitudes and the
past: repeated decision making or a matter attitude-behavior relation: reasoned and au-
of habit? J. Appl. Soc. Psychol. 28:1355– tomatic processes. In European Review of
74 Social Psychology, ed. W Stroebe, M Hew-
Abrams D, Ando K, Hinkle S. 1998. Psycholog- stone. Chichester, England: Wiley. In press
ical attachment to the group: cross-cultural Ajzen I, Sexton J. 1999. Depth of processing,
differences in organizational identification belief congruence, and attitude-behavior cor-
and subjective norms as predictors of work- respondence. In Dual-Process Theories in
ers’ turnover intentions. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Social Psychology, ed. S Chaiken, Y Trope,
Bull. 24:1027–39 pp. 117–38. New York: Guilford
Ajzen I. 1991. The theory of planned behavior. Albarracin D, Fishbein M, Goldestein de
P1: FXY
ATTITUDES 49
Muchinik E. 1997. Seeking social support in Bargh JA, Chartrand TL. 1999. The unbearable
old age as reasoned action: structural and vo- automaticity of being. Am. Psychol. 54:462–
litional determinants in a middle-aged sam- 79
ple of Argentinean women. J. Appl. Soc. Psy- Bassili JN. 1995. Response latency and the ac-
chol. 27:463–76 cessibility of voting intentions: what con-
Albarracin D, Fishbein M, Middlestadt S. 1998. tributes to accessibility and how it affects
Generalizing behavioral findings across vote choice. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 21:686–
times, samples, and measures: a study of 95
condom use. J. Appl. Soc. Psychol. 28:657– Bassili JN. 1996. Meta-judgmental versus oper-
74 ative indexes of psychological attributes: the
Armitage CJ, Conner M. 1999a. Distinguish- case of measures of attitude strength. J. Pers.
ing perceptions of control from self-efficacy: Soc. Psychol. 71:637–53

predicting consumption of a low-fat diet us- Bassili JN, Roy J-P. 1998. On the representation
ing the theory of planned behavior. J. Appl. of strong and weak attitudes about policy in
Soc. Psychol. 29:72–90 memory. Polit. Psychol. 19:669–81
Armitage CJ, Conner M. 1999b. The theory of Bell DW, Esses VM. 1997. Ambivalence and re-
planned behaviour: assessment of predictive sponse amplification toward native peoples.
validity and ‘perceived control’. Br. J. Soc. J. Appl. Soc. Psychol. 27:1063–84
Psychol. 38:35–54 Bentler PM, Speckart G. 1979. Models of
Armitage CJ, Conner M. 2000. Efficacy of the attitude-behavior relations. Psychol. Rev.
theory of planned behavior: a meta-analytic 86:452–64
review. Br. J. Soc. Psychol. In press Biek M, Wood W, Chaiken S. 1996. Working
Armitage CJ, Conner M. 2000. Attitudinal am- knowledge, cognitive processing, and atti-
bivalence: a test of three key hypotheses. tudes: on the determinants of bias. Pers. Soc.
Pers. Soc. Psychol. Bull. In press Psychol. Bull. 22:547–56
Armitage CJ, Conner M, Norman P. 1999. Dif- Blessum KA, Lord CG, Sia TL. 1998. Cogni-
ferential effects of mood on information pro- tive load and positive mood reduce typicality
cessing: evidence from the theories of rea- effects in attitude-behavior consistency. Pers.
soned action and planned behaviour. Eur. J. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 24:496–504
Soc. Psychol. 29:419–33 Boldero J, Sanitioso R, Brain B. 1999. Gay
Arnscheid R, Schomers P. 1996. Attitude and Asian Australians’ safer-sex behavior and
performance in groups: a test of the theory behavioral skills: the predictive utility of
of planned behavior on basketball players. Z. the theory of planned behavior and cul-
Sozialpsychol. 27:61–69 tural factors. J. Appl. Soc. Psychol. 29:2143–
Banaji MR, Prentice DA. 1994. The self in so- 63
cial context. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 45:297–332 Bornstein RF. 1989. Exposure and affect:
Bandura A. 1997. Self-Efficacy: The Exercise overview and meta-analysis of research,
of Control. New York: Freeman 1968–1987. Psychol. Bull. 106:265–89
Bargh JA, Chaiken S, Govender R, Pratto F. Braithwaite V. 1997. Harmony and security
1992. The generality of the automatic atti- value orientations in political evaluation.
tude activation effect. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 23:401–14
62:893–912 Braithwaite V. 1998. The value orientations un-
Bargh JA, Chaiken S, Raymond P, Hymes C. derlying liberalism-conservatism. Pers. Indi-
1996. The automatic evaluation effect: un- vid. Differ. 25:575–89
conditional automatic attitude activation with Brendl CM, Higgins ET. 1996. Principles of
a pronunciation task. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. judging valence: What makes events positive
32:104–28 or negative? In Advances in Experimental
P1: FXY
50 AJZEN
Social Psychology, ed. MP Zanna, 28:95– Conner M, Sparks P. 1996. The theory of
160. San Diego, CA: Academic planned behaviour and health behaviours. In
Budd RJ. 1986. Predicting cigarette use: the Predicting Health Behaviour: Research and
need to incorporate measures of salience in Practice with Social Cognition Models, ed.
the theory of reasoned action. J. Appl. Soc. M Conner, P Norman, pp. 121–62. Bucking-
Psychol. 16:663–85 ham, England: Open Univ. Press
Cacioppo JT, Berntson GG. 1994. Relationship Conner M, Warren R, Close S, Sparks P. 1999.
between attitudes and evaluative space: a Alcohol consumption and theory of planned
critical review, with emphasis on the sepa- behavior: an examination of the cognitive
rability of positive and negative substrates. mediation of past behavior. J. Appl. Soc. Psy-
Psychol. Bull. 115:401–23 chol. 29:1676–704
Cacioppo JT, Crites SL Jr, Gardner WL. 1996. Courneya KS, Bobick TM, Schinke RJ. 1999a.
Attitudes to the right: evaluative process- Does the theory of planned behavior mediate
ing is associated with lateralized late posi- the relation between personality and exercise
tive event-related brain potentials. Pers. Soc. behavior? Basic Appl. Soc. Psychol. 21:317–
Psychol. Bull. 22:1205–19 24
Cacioppo JT, Gardner WL. 1999. Emotion. Courneya KS, Friedenreich CM, Arthur K,
Annu. Rev. Psychol. 50:191–214 Bobick TM. 1999b. Understanding exercise
Chen M, Bargh JA. 1999. Consequences of motivation in colorectal cancer patients: a
automatic evaluation: immediate behavioral prospective study using the theory of planned
predispositions to approach or avoid the stim- behavior. Rehabil. Psychol. 44:68–84
ulus. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 25:215–24 Crandall CS, Martinez R. 1996. Culture, ideol-
Conner M, Armitage CJ. 1998. Extending the ogy, and antifat attitudes. Pers. Soc. Psychol.
theory of planned behavior: a review and av- Bull. 22:1165–76
enues for further research. J. Appl. Soc. Psy- Crano WD. 1997a. Vested interest and sym-
chol. 28:1429–64 bolic politics—observations and recommen-
Conner M, Black K, Stratton P. 1998a. Under- dations: reply to Sears (1997). J. Pers. Soc.
standing drug compliance in a psychiatric Psychol. 72:497–500
population: an application of the Theory Crano WD. 1997b. Vested interest, symbolic
of Planned Behaviour. Psychol. Health Med. politics, and attitude-behavior consistency. J.
3:337–44 Pers. Soc. Psychol. 72:485–91
Conner M, Heywood-Everett S. 1998. Address- Crites SL Jr, Cacioppo JT. 1996. Electrocortical
ing mental health problems with the Theory differentiation of evaluative and nonevalua-
of Planned Behaviour. Psychol. Health Med. tive categorizations. Psychol. Sci. 7:318–21
3:87–95 de Vroome EMM, Stroebe W, Sandfort TGM,
Conner M, McMillan B. 1999. Interaction ef- de Witt JBF, van Griensven GJP. 2000. Safe
fects in the theory of planned behavior: sex in social context: individualistic and re-
studying cannabis use. Br. J. Soc. Psychol. lational determinants of AIDS preventive be-
38:195–222 havior among gay men. J. Appl. Soc. Psychol.
Conner M, Sheeran P, Norman P, Armitage CJ. In press
2000. Temporal stability as a moderator of de Witt JBF, Stroebe W, de Vroome EMM,
the relationships in the theory of planned be- Sandfort TGM, van Griensven GJP. 2000.
havior. Br. J. Soc. Psychol. In press Understanding AIDS preventive behavior in
Conner M, Sherlock K, Orbell S. 1998b. Psy- homosexual men: the theory of planned
chosocial determinants of ecstasy use in behavior and the information-motivation-
young people in the UK. Br. J. Health Psy- behavioral-skills model prospectively com-
chol. 3:295–317 pared. Psychol. Health. In press
P1: FXY
ATTITUDES 51
Demo DH. 1989. The self-concept over rent affect. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 74:967–84
time: research issues and directions. Annu. Finlay KA, Trafimow D, Jones D. 1997. Pre-
Rev. Sociol. 18:23–52 dicting health behaviors from attitudes and
Demski RM, McGlynn RP. 1999. Fear or moral subjective norms: between-subjects and
indignation? Predicting attitudes toward within-subjects analyses. J. Appl. Soc. Psy-
parolees. J. Appl. Soc. Psychol. 29:2024–58 chol. 27:2015–31
Eagly AH. 1998. Attitudes and the processing Finlay KA, Trafimow D, Moroi E. 1999. The
of attitude-relevant information. In Advances importance of subjective norms on intentions
in Psychological Science, Vol. 1. Social, Per- to perform health behaviors. J. Appl. Soc.
sonal, and Cultural Aspects, ed. JG Adair, D Psychol. 29:2381–93
Belanger, pp. 185–201. Hove, UK: Psychol. Fishbein M. 1963. An investigation of the rela-
Press/Erlbaum (UK) Taylor & Francis tionships between beliefs about an object and
Eagly AH, Chaiken S. 1993. The Psychology of the attitude toward that object. Hum. Relat.
Attitudes. Fort Worth, TX: Harcourt Brace 16:233–40

Eagly AH, Chaiken S. 1998. Attitude structure Fishbein M, Ajzen I. 1975. Belief, Attitude,
and function. In The Handbook of Social Psy- Intention, and Behavior: An Introduction
chology, ed. DT Gilbert, ST Fiske, 2:269– to Theory and Research. Reading, MA:
322. Boston: McGraw-Hill. 4th ed. Addison-Wesley
Eagly AH, Chen S, Chaiken S, Shaw-Barnes K. Fishbein M, Middlestadt S. 1995. Noncognitive
1999. The impact of attitudes on memory: an effects on attitude formation and change: fact
affair to remember. Psychol. Bull. 125:64–89 or artifact? J. Consum. Psychol. 4:181–202
Fazio RH, Jackson JR, Dunton BC, Williams Fishbein M, Middlestadt SE. 1997. A striking
CJ. 1995. Variability in automatic activation lack of evidence for nonbelief-based attitude
as an unobstrusive measure of racial atti- formation and change: a response to five
tudes: a bona fide pipeline? J. Pers. Soc. commentaries. J. Consum. Psychol. 6:107–
Psychol. 69:1013–27 15
Fazio RH, Sanbonmatsu DM, Powell MC, Fiske ST. 1993. Social cognition and social per-
Kardes FR. 1986. On the automatic activation ception. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 44:155–94
of attitudes. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 50:229–38 Fiske ST, Glick P. 1995. Ambivalence and
Fazio RH, Towles-Schwen T. 1999. The MODE stereotypes cause sexual harassment: a the-
model of attitude-behavior processes. In ory with implications for organizational
Dual-Process Theories in Social Psychology, change. J. Soc. Issues 51:97–115
ed. S Chaiken, Y Trope, pp. 97–116. New Gaertner SL, Dovidio JF. 1986. The aversive
York: Guilford form of racism. In Prejudice, Discrimination,
Feather NT, ed. 1982. Expectations and and Racism, ed. JF Dovidio, SL Gaertner, pp.
Actions: Expectancy-Value Models in Psy- 61–89. Orlando, FL: Academic
chology. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum Giner-Sorolla R. 1999. Affect in attitude: im-
Feather NT. 1996. Values, deservingness, and mediate and deliberative perspectives. In
attitudes toward high achievers: research on Dual-Process Theories in Social Psychology,
tall poppies. See Seligman et al 1996, pp. ed. S Chaiken, Y Trope, pp. 441–61. New
215–51 York: Guilford
Feather NT, Norman MA, Worsley A. 1998. Giner-Sorolla R, Garcia MT, Bargh JA. 1999.
Values and valences: variables relating to the The automatic evaluation of pictures. Soc.
attractiveness and choice of food in different Cogn. 17:76–96
contexts. J. Appl. Soc. Psychol. 28:639–56 Glaser J, Banaji MR. 1999. When fair is foul
Feldman Barrett L, Russell JA. 1998. Indepen- and foul is fair: reverse priming in automatic
dence and bipolarity in the structure of cur- evaluation. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 77:669–87
P1: FXY
52 AJZEN
Gollwitzer PM. 1996. The volitional benefits of of planned behavior. J. Appl. Soc. Psychol.
planning. In The Psychology of Action: Link- 29:2505–28
ing Cognition and Motivation to Behavior, Haugtvedt CP. 1997. Beyond fact or artifact:
ed. PM Gollwitzer, JA Bargh, pp. 287–312. an assessment of Fishbein and Middlestadt’s
New York: Guilford perspectives on attitude change processes. J.
Gollwitzer PM. 1999. Implementation inten- Consum. Psychol. 6:99–106
tions: strong effects of simple plans. Am. Higgins ET. 1987. Self-discrepancies: a theory
Psychol. 54:493–503 relating self and affect. Psychol. Rev. 94:319–
Gollwitzer PM, Brandstaetter V. 1997. Imple- 40
mentation intentions and effective goal pur- Higgins ET. 1996. Knowledge activation: ac-
suit. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 73:186–99 cessibility, applicability, and salience. In So-
Gollwitzer PM, Schaal B. 1998. Metacognition cial Psychology: Handbook of Basic Prin-
in action: the importance of implementation ciples, ed. ET Higgins, AW Kruglanski, pp.
intentions. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Rev. 2:124– 133–68. New York: Guilford
36 Hill M, Mann L, Wearing AJ. 1996. The effects
Greenwald AG, Banaji MR. 1995. Implicit so- of attitude, subjective norm and self-efficacy
cial cognition: attitudes, self-esteem, and on intention to benchmark: a comparison be-
stereotypes. Psychol. Rev. 102:4–27 tween managers with experience and no ex-
Greenwald AG, McGhee DE, Schwartz JLK. perience in benchmarking. J. Organ. Behav.
1998. Measuring individual differences in 17:313–27
implicit cognition: the implicit association Hillhouse JJ, Adler CM, Drinnon J, Turrisi
test. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 74:1464–80 R. 1997. Application of Ajzen’s theory of
Grogan SC, Bell R, Conner M. 1997. Eat- planned behavior to predict sunbathing, tan-
ing sweet snacks: gender differences in ning salon use, and sunscreen use intentions
attitudes and behaviour. Appetite 28:19– and behaviors. J. Behav. Med. 20:365–78
31 Hilton JL, von Hippel W. 1996. Stereotypes.
Haddock G, Rothman AJ, Reber R, Schwarz Annu. Rev. Psychol. 47:237–71
N. 1999. Forming judgments of attitude cer- Ito TA, Cacioppo JT, Lang PJ. 1998a. Eliciting
tainty, intensity, and importance: the role affect using the International Affective Pic-
of subjective experience. Pers. Soc. Psychol. ture System: trajectories through evaluative
Bull. 25:771–82 space. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 24:855–79
Haddock G, Rothman AJ, Schwarz N. 1996. Ito TA, Larsen JT, Smith NK, Cacioppo JT.
Are (some) reports of attitude strength con- 1998b. Negative information weighs more
text dependent? Can. J. Behav. Sci. 28:313– heavily on the brain: the negativity bias in
16 evaluative categorizations. J. Pers. Soc. Psy-
Haddock G, Zanna MP. 1998. Assessing the im- chol. 75:887–900
pact of affective and cognitive information Jamner MS, Wolitski RJ, Corby NH, Fishbein
in predicting attitudes toward capital punish- M. 1998. Using the theory of planned be-
ment. Law Hum. Behav. 22:325–39 havior to predict intention to use condoms
Haddock G, Zanna MP. 2000. Cognition, af- among female sex workers. Psychol. Health
fect, and the prediction of social attitudes. In 13:187–205
European Review of Social Psychology, Vol. Jarvis WBG, Petty RE. 1996. The need to eval-
10, ed. W Stroebe, M Hewstone. Chichester, uate. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 70:172–94
UK: Wiley. In press Johnson-Laird PN. 1999. Deductive reasoning.
Harland P, Staats H, Wilke HAM. 1999. Ex- Annu. Rev. Psychol. 50:109–35
plaining proenvironmental intention and be- Jonas K, Diehl M, Bromer P. 1997. Effects
havior by personal norms and the theory of attitudinal ambivalence on information
P1: FXY
ATTITUDES 53
processing and attitude-intention consis- tributes in attitude judgments. J. Pers. Soc.

tency. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 33:190–210 Psychol. 70:230–40
Kaiser FG, Woelfing S, Fuhrer U. 1999. Envi- Levine JM, Moreland RL. 1990. Progress in
ronmental attitude and ecological behaviour. small group research. Annu. Rev. Psychol.
J. Environ. Psychol. 19:1–19 41:585–634
Kempf DS. 1999. Attitude formation from Liberman A, Chaiken S. 1996. The direct effect
product trial: distinct roles of cognition and of personal relevance on attitudes. Pers. Soc.
affect for hedonic and functional products. Psychol. Bull. 22:269–79
Psychol. Mark. 16:35–50 Liberman N, Trope Y. 1998. The role of feasi-
Kendzierski D, Whitaker DJ. 1997. The role of bility and desirability considerations in near
self-schema in linking intentions with behav- and distant future decisions: a test of tem-
ior. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 23:139–47 poral construal theory. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol.
Klein JG. 1996. Negativity in impressions of 75:5–18
presidential candidates revisited: the 1992 Lord CG, Lepper MR. 1999. Attitude represen-
election. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 22:288– tation theory. In Advances in Experimental
95 Social Psychology, ed. MP Zanna, 31:265–
Kokkinaki F, Lunt P. 1997. The relationship be- 343. San Diego, CA: Academic
tween involvement, attitude accessibility and MacDonald TK, Zanna MP. 1998. Cross-
attitude-behaviour consistency. Br. J. Soc. dimension ambivalence toward social
Psychol. 36:497–509 groups: can ambivalence affect intentions
Kokkinaki F, Lunt P. 1999. The effect of adver- to hire feminists? Pers. Soc. Psychol. Bull.
tising message involvement on brand attitude 24:427–41
accessibility. J. Econ. Psychol. 20:41–51 MacDonald TK, Zanna MP, Fong GT. 1996.
Kristiansen CM, Hotte AM. 1996. Morality Why common sense goes out the window:
and the self: implications for the when and effects of alcohol on intentions to use con-
how of value-attitude-behavior relations. See doms. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 22:763–75
Seligman et al 1996, pp. 77–105 Maio GR, Bell DW, Esses VM. 1996. Ambiva-
Krosnick JA, Boninger DS, Chuang YC, Berent lence and persuasion: the processing of mes-
MK, et al. 1993. Attitude strength: one con- sages about immigrant groups. J. Exp. Soc.
struct or many related constructs? J. Pers. Psychol. 32:513–36
Soc. Psychol. 65:1132–51 Maio GR, Fincham FD, Lycett EJ. 2000. Atti-
Lavine H, Huff JW, Wagner SH, Sweeney D. tudinal ambivalence toward parents and at-
1998a. The moderating influence of attitude tachment style. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Bull. In
strength on the susceptibility to context ef- press
fects in attitude surveys. J. Pers. Soc. Psy- Maio GR, Olson JM. 1998. Values as truisms:
chol. 75:359–73 evidence and implications. J. Pers. Soc. Psy-
Lavine H, Thomsen CJ, Zanna MP, Borgida E. chol. 74:294–311
1998b. On the primacy of affect in the de- Maio GR, Olson JM, eds. 1999. Why We Eval-
termination of attitudes and behavior: the uate: Functions of Attitudes. Mahwah, NJ:
moderating role of affective-cognitive am- Erlbaum
bivalence. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 34:398–421 Manstead ASR. 2000. The role of moral norm
Leone L, Perugini M, Ercolani AP. 1999. in the attitude-behavior relationship. In At-
A comparison of three models of attitude- titudes, Behavior, and Social Context: The
behavior relationships in the studying behav- Role of Norms and Group Membership, ed.
ior domain. Eur. J. Soc. Psychol. 29:161–89 DJ Terry, MA Hogg. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Levine GM, Halberstadt JB, Goldstone RL. In press
1996. Reasoning and the weighting of at- Manstead ASR, van Eekelen SAM. 1998.
P1: FXY
54 AJZEN
Distinguishing between perceived behavioral Wells EA. 1996. Children’s decisions about
control and self-efficacy in the domain of aca- substance use: an application and extension
demic intentions and behaviors. J. Appl. Soc. of the theory of reasoned action. J. Appl. Soc.
Psychol. 28:1375–92 Psychol. 26:1658–79
Markman AB, Brendl CM. 2000. The influence Munro GD, Ditto PH. 1997. Biased assimila-
of goals on value and choice. In The Psychol- tion, attitude polarization, and affect in reac-
ogy of Learning and Motivation, Vol. 39, ed. tions to stereotyped-relevant scientific infor-
DL Medin. San Diego, CA: Academic. In mation. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 23:636–53
press Murray SL, Haddock G, Zanna MP. 1996.
Matthews D, Dietz-Uhler B. 1998. The black- On creating value-expressive attitudes: an
sheep effect: how positive and negative ad- experimental approach. See Seligman et al
vertisements affect voter’s perceptions of the 1996, pp. 107–33

sponsor of the advertisement. J. Appl. Soc. Norman P, Conner M, Bell R. 1999. The theory
Psychol. 28:1903–15 of planned behavior and smoking cessation.

McConnell AR, Leibold JM, Sherman SJ. 1997. Health Psychol. 18:89–94
Within-target illusory correlations and the Nowlis V. 1965. Research with the Mood Ad-
formation of context-dependent attitudes. J. jective Checklist. In Affect, Cognition, and
Pers. Soc. Psychol. 73:675–86 Personality, ed. SS Tomkin, CE Izard, pp.
McGregor I, Newby-Clark IR, Zanna MP. 1999. 352–89. New York: Springer
“Remembering” dissonance: simultaneous O’Callaghan FV, Callan VJ, Baglioni A.
accessibility of inconsistent cognitive ele- 1999. Cigarette use by adolescents: attitude-
ments moderates epistemic discomfort. In behavior relationships. Subst. Use Misuse
Cognitive Dissonance: Progress on a Pivotal 34:455–68
Theory in Social Psychology. Science Con- Ohira H, Winton WM, Oyama M. 1998. Effects
ference Series, ed. E Harmon-Jones, J Mills, of stimulus valence on recognition memory
pp. 325–53. Washington, DC: Am. Psychol. and endogenous eyeblinks: further evidence
Assoc. for positive-negative asymmetry. Pers. Soc.
McGuire WJ, McGuire CV. 1996. Enhancing Psychol. Bull. 24:986–93
self-esteem by directed-thinking tasks: cog- Olson JM, Roese NJ, Zanna MP. 1996. Ex-
nitive and affective positivity asymmetries. J. pectancies. In Social Psychology: Handbook
Pers. Soc. Psychol. 70:1117–25 of Basic Principles, ed. ET Higgins, AW
Mellers BA, Schwartz A, Cooke ADJ. 1998. Kruglanski, pp. 211–38. New York: Guil-
Judgment and decision making. Annu. Rev. ford
Psychol. 49:447–77 Osgood CE, Suci GJ, Tannenbaum PH. 1957.
Millar MG, Millar KU. 1996. The effects of di- The Measurement of Meaning. Urbana, IL:
rect and indirect experience on affective and Univ. Illinois Press
cognitive responses and the attitude-behavior Ouellette JA, Wood W. 1998. Habit and inten-
relation. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 32:561–79 tion in everyday life: the multiple processes
Millar MG, Millar KU. 1998. The effects of by which past behavior predicts future be-
prior experience and thought on the attitude- havior. Psychol. Bull. 124:54–74
behavior relation. Soc. Behav. Pers. 26:105– Paisley CM, Sparks P. 1998. Expectations of re-
14 ducing fat intake: the role of perceived need
Miniard PW, Barone MJ. 1997. The case for within the theory of planned behavior. Psy-
noncognitive determinants of attitude: a cri- chol. Health 13:341–53
tique of Fishbein and Middlestadt. J. Con- Pettigrew TF. 1998. Intergroup contact theory.
sum. Psychol. 6:77–91 Annu. Rev. Psychol. 49:65–85
Morrison DM, Gillmore MR, Simpson EE, Petty RE, Jarvis WBG. 1996. An individual
P1: FXY
ATTITUDES 55
differences perspective on assessing cog- schoolboy cyclists: a comparison of the the-

nitive processes. In Answering Questions: ory of planned behavior and the health belief
Methodology for Determining Cognitive and model. Psychol. Health 13:251–69
Communicative Processes in Survey Re- Ratcliff CD, Czuchry M, Scarberry NC,
search, ed. N Schwarz, S Sudman, pp. 221– Thomas JC, Dansereau DF, Lord CG. 1999.
57. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Effects of directed thinking on intentions to
Petty RE, Krosnick JA, eds. 1995. Attitude engage in beneficial activities: actions versus
Strength: Antecedents and Consequences, reasons. J. Appl. Soc. Psychol. 29:994–1009
Vol. 4. Ohio State Univ. Series on attitudes Reeder GD, Pryor JB. 1999. Attitudes toward
and persuasion. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum persons with HIV/AIDS: linking a functional
Petty RE, Wegener DT. 1998. Matching versus approach with underlying process. In Why
mismatching attitude functions: implications We Evaluate: Functions of Attitudes, ed. G

for scrutiny of persuasive messages. Pers. Maio, J Olson, pp. 295–323. Mahwah, NJ:
Soc. Psychol. Bull. 24:227–40 Erlbaum

Petty RE, Wegener DT, Fabrigar LR. 1997. At- Reinecke J, Schmidt P, Ajzen I. 1996. Appli-
titudes and attitude change. Annu. Rev. Psy- cation of the theory of planned behavior to
chol. 48:609–47 adolescents’ condom use: a panel study. J.
Posavac SS, Sanbonmatsu DM, Fazio RH. Appl. Soc. Psychol. 26:749–72
1997. Considering the best choice: effects of Richard R, de Vries NK, van der Pligt J. 1998.
the salience and accessibility of alternatives Anticipated regret and precautionary sexual
on attitude-decision consistency. J. Pers. Soc. behavior. J. Appl. Soc. Psychol. 28:1411–
Psychol. 72:253–61 28
Priester JR, Fleming MA. 1997. Artifact or Rise J, Astrom AN, Sutton S. 1998. Predict-
meaningful theoretical constructs?: examin- ing intentions and use of dental floss among
ing evidence for nonbelief- and belief-based adolescents: an application of the theory of
attitude change processes. J. Consum. Psy- planned behavior. Psychol. Health 13:223–
chol. 6:67–76 36
Priester JR, Petty RE. 1996. The gradual thresh- Robinson JP, Shaver PR, Wrightsman LS, eds.
old model of ambivalence: relating the pos- 1999. Measures of Political Attitudes. Mea-
itive and negative bases of attitudes to sub- sures of Social Psychological Attitudes, Vol.
jective ambivalence. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 2. San Diego, CA: Academic
71:431–49 Russell JA, Carroll JM. 1999. On the bipolarity
Prislin R. 1996. Attitude stability and attitude of positive and negative affect. Psychol. Bull.
strength: One is enough to make it stable. 125:3–30
Eur. J. Soc. Psychol. 26:447–77 Schultz PW, Oskamp S. 1996. Effort as a
Prislin R, Ouellette J. 1996. When it is embed- moderator of the attitude-behavior relation-
ded, it is potent: effects of general attitude ship: general environmental concern and re-
embeddedness on formation of specific at- cycling. Soc. Psychol. Q. 59:375–83
titudes and behavioral intentions. Pers. Soc. Schwartz SH. 1992. Universals in the content
Psychol. Bull. 22:845–61 and structure of values: theoretical advances
Quine L, Rubin R. 1997. Attitude, subjective and empirical tests in 20 countries. In Ad-
norm and perceived behavioural control as vances in Experimental Social Psychology,
predictors of women’s intentions to take hor- ed. MP Zanna, 25:1–65. San Diego, CA:
mone replacement therapy. Br. J. Health Psy- Academic
chol. 2:199–216 Schwarz N. 1997. Moods and attitude judg-
Quine L, Rutter DR, Arnold L. 1998. Predicting ments: a comment on Fishbein and Mid-
and understanding safety helmet use among dlestadt. J. Consum. Psychol. 6:93–98
P1: FXY
56 AJZEN
Schwarz N, Clore GL. 1983. Mood, misattribu- to use condoms: a meta-analysis and com-
tion, and judgments of well-being: informa- parison of the theories of reasoned action
tive and directive functions of affective states. and planned behavior. J. Appl. Soc. Psychol.
J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 45:513–23 29:1624–75
Schwarz N, Clore GL. 1996. Feelings and phe- Sia TL, Lord CG, Blessum KA, Ratcliff CD,
nomenal experiences. In Social Psychology: Lepper MR. 1997. Is a rose always a rose?
Handbook of Basic Principles, ed. ET Hig- The role of social category exemplar change
gins, AW Kruglanski, pp. 433–65. New York: in attitude stability and attitude-behavior
Guilford consistency. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 72:501–
Sears DO. 1997. The impact of self-interest on 14
attitudes—a symbolic politics perspective on Sia TL, Lord CG, Blessum KA, Thomas JC,
differences between survey and experimental Lepper MR. 1999. Activation of exemplars
findings: comment on Crano (1997). J. Pers. in the process of assessing social category
Soc. Psychol. 72:492–96 attitudes. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 76:517–32

Seligman C, Olson JM, Zanna MP, eds. 1996. Simons J, Carey KB. 1998. A structural analy-
The Psychology of Values: The Ontario Sym- sis of attitudes toward alcohol and marijuana
posium, Vol. 8. The Ontario Symposium on use. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 24:727–35
Personality and Social Psychology. Mahwah, Sjoeberg L, Montgomery H. 1999. Double de-
NJ: Erlbaum nial in attitude formation. J. Appl. Soc. Psy-
Shah J, Higgins ET. 1997. Expectancy × value chol. 29:606–21
effects: regulatory focus as determinant of Smith ER, Fazio RH, Cejka MA. 1996. Ac-
magnitude and direction. J. Pers. Soc. Psy- cessible attitudes influence categorization of
chol. 73:447–58 multiply categorizable objects. J. Pers. Soc.
Sheeran P, Norman P, Orbell S. 1999a. Psychol. 71:888–98
Evidence that intentions based on attitudes Sparks P, Guthrie CA. 1998. Self-identity and
better predict behaviour than intentions based the theory of planned behavior: a useful ad-
on subjective norms. Eur. J. Soc. Psychol. dition or an unhelpful artifice? J. Appl. Soc.
29:403–6 Psychol. 28:1393–410
Sheeran P, Orbell S. 1998. Do intentions pre- Sparks P, Guthrie CA, Shepherd R. 1997. The
dict condom use? Meta-analysis and exami- dimensional structure of the perceived behav-
nation of six moderator variables. Br. J. Soc. ioral control construct. J. Appl. Soc. Psychol.
Psychol. 37:231–50 27:418–38
Sheeran P, Orbell S. 1999a. Augmenting the Steele CM, Josephs RA. 1990. Alcohol myopia:
theory of planned behavior: roles for antic- its prized and dangerous effects. Am. Psy-
ipated regret and descriptive norms. J. Appl. chol. 45:921–33
Soc. Psychol. 29:2107–42 Sutton S. 1998. Predicting and explaining inten-
Sheeran P, Orbell S. 1999b. Implementation in- tions and behavior: How well are we doing?
tentions and repeated behaviour: augment- J. Appl. Soc. Psychol. 28:1317–38
ing the predictive validity of the theory of Taylor S, Todd P. 1997. Understanding the de-
planned behaviour. Eur. J. Soc. Psychol. terminants of consumer composting behav-
29:349–69 ior. J. Appl. Soc. Psychol. 27:602–28
Sheeran P, Orbell S, Trafimow D. 1999b. Does Terry DJ, Hogg MA. 1996. Group norms and
the temporal stability of behavioral inten- the attitude-behavior relationship: a role for
tions moderate intention-behavior and past group identification. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Bull.
behavior-future behavior relations? Pers. 22:776–93
Soc. Psychol. Bull. 25:721–30 Tesser A, Martin L. 1996. The psychology of
Sheeran P, Taylor S. 1999. Predicting intentions evaluation. In Social Psychology: Handbook
P1: FXY
ATTITUDES 57
of Basic Principles, ed. ET Higgins, AW van Harreveld F, van der Pligt J, de Vries NK,
Kruglanski, pp. 400–32. New York: Guil- Andreas S. 2000. The structure of attitudes:
ford attribute importance, accessibility, and judg-
Thompson MM, Zanna MP, Griffin DW. 1995. ment. Br. J. Soc. Psychol. In press
Let’s not be indifferent about (attitudi- Verplanken B, Aarts H, van Knippenberg A,
nal) ambivalence. In Attitude Strength: An- Moonen A. 1998a. Habit versus planned be-
tecedents and Consequences. Ohio State havior: a field experiment. Br. J. Soc. Psy-
University Series on Attitudes and Persua- chol. 37:111–28
sion, ed. RE Petty, JA Krosnick, 4:361–86. Verplanken B, Aarts H, van Knippenberg A.
Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum 1997. Habit, information acquisition, and the
Thurstone LL. 1931. The measurement of social process of making travel mode choices. Eur.
attitudes. J. Abnorm. Soc. Psychol. 26:249– J. Soc. Psychol. 27:539–60

69 Verplanken B, Faes S. 1999. Good intentions,
Trafimow D. 1996. The importance of atti- bad habits, and effects of forming implemen-
tudes in the prediction of college students’ tation intentions on healthy eating. Eur. J.
intentions to drink. J. Appl. Soc. Psychol. Soc. Psychol. 29:591–604
26:2167–88 Verplanken B, Hofstee G, Janssen HJW. 1998b.
Trafimow D, Duran A. 1998. Some tests of Accessibility of affective versus cognitive
the distinction between attitude and per- components of attitudes. Eur. J. Soc. Psychol.
ceived behavioural control. Br. J. Soc. Psy- 28:23–35
chol. 37:1–14 Vincent PC, Peplau LA, Hill CT. 1998. A longi-
Trafimow D, Finlay KA. 1996. The importance tudinal application of the theory of reasoned
of subjective norms for a minority of people: action to women’s career behavior. J. Appl.
between-subjects and within-subjects analy- Soc. Psychol. 28:761–78
ses. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 22:820–28 Visser PS, Krosnick JA. 1998. Development of
Trafimow D, Trafimow JH. 1998. Predicting attitude strength over the life cycle: surge and
back pain sufferers’ intentions to exercise. decline. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 75:1389–410
J. Psychol. 132:581–92 Waenke M, Bless H, Biller B. 1996. Subjective
Triandis HC. 1977. Interpersonal Behavior. experience versus content of information in
Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole the construction of attitude judgments. Pers.
van der Pligt J, de Vries NK. 1998. Belief Soc. Psychol. Bull. 22:1105–13
importance in expectancy-value models of Watson D, Tellegen A. 1999. Issues in the di-
attitudes. J. Appl. Soc. Psychol. 28:1339– mensional structure of affect—effects of de-
54 scriptors, measurement error, and response
van der Pligt J, de Vries NK, Manstead ASR, format: comment on Russell and Carroll
van Harreveld F. 2000. The importance of be- (1999). Psychol. Bull. 125:601–10
ing selective: weighing the role of attribute Wilson TD, Lindsey S, Schooler TY. 2000.
importance in attitudinal judgment. In Ad- A model of dual attitudes. Psychol. Rev.
vances in Experimental Social Psychology, 107:101–26
Vol. 32, ed. MP Zanna. New York: Aca- Winkielman P, Zajonc RB, Schwarz N. 1997.
demic. In press Subliminal affective priming resists attribu-
van der Pligt J, Zeelenberg M, van Dijk WW, de tional interventions. Cogn. Emot. 11:433–
Vries NK, Richard R. 1998. Affect, attitudes 65
and decisions: Let’s be more specific. In Eu- Wojciszke B, Bazinska R, Jaworski M. 1998.
ropean Review of Social Psychology, ed. W On the dominance of moral categories in im-
Stroebe, M Hewstone, 8:33–66. Chichester, pression formation. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Bull.
UK: Wiley 24:1251–63
P1: FXY
58 AJZEN
Wood W. 2000. Attitude change: Persuasion the private self or collective self affects the
and social influence. Annu. Rev. Psychol. relative weights of attitudes and subjective
51:539–70 norms. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 24:362–
Wyman MA, Snyder M. 1997. Attitudes toward 70
“gays in the military”: a functional perspec- Zajonc RB. 1980. Feeling and thinking: pref-
tive. J. Appl. Soc. Psychol. 27:306–29 erences need no inferences. Am. Psychol.
Ybarra O, Trafimow D. 1998. How priming 35:117–23
Annual Review of Psychology
Volume 52, 2001
CONTENTS
SOCIAL COGNITIVE THEORY: An Agentic Perspective, Albert
Bandura 1
NATURE AND OPERATION OF ATTITUDES, Icek Ajzen 27
META-ANALYSIS: Recent Developments in Quantitative Methods for
Literature Reviews, R. Rosenthal, M. R. DiMatteo 59
ADOLESCENT DEVELOPMENT, Laurence Steinberg, Amanda
Sheffield Morris 83
THEORIES OF ASSOCIATIVE LEARNING IN ANIMALS, John M.
Pearce, Mark E. Bouton 111
ON HAPPINESS AND HUMAN POTENTIALS: A Review of Research
on Hedonic and Eudaimonic Well-Being, Richard M. Ryan, Edward L.
Deci 141
SENTENCE AND TEXT COMPREHENSION: Roles of Linguistic

Structure, Charles Clifton Jr., Susan A. Duffy 167

PERSONALITY, David C. Funder 197
THINKING, Arthur B. Markman, Dedre Gentner 223
CONSUMER RESEARCH: In Search of Identity, Itamar Simonson, Ziv
Carmon, Ravi Dhar, Aimee Drolet, Stephen M. Nowlis 249
SLEEP-WAKE AS A BIOLOGICAL RHYTHM, P. Lavie 277
STATISTICAL GRAPHICS: Mapping the Pathways of Science, Howard
Wainer, Paul F. Velleman 305
THE DEVELOPMENT OF VISUAL ATTENTION IN INFANCY, John
Colombo 337
PSYCHOLINGUISTICS: A Cross-Language Perspective, Elizabeth
Bates, Antonella Devescovi, Beverly Wulfeck 369
JOB BURNOUT, Christina Maslach, Wilmar B. Schaufeli, Michael P.
Leiter 397
OLFACTION, Richard L. Doty 423
ACQUISITION OF INTELLECTUAL AND PERCEPTUAL-MOTOR
SKILLS, David A. Rosenbaum, Richard A. Carlson, Rick O. Gilmore
453
THE SCIENCE OF TRAINING: A Decade of Progress, Eduardo Salas,
Janis A. Cannon-Bowers 471
COMPARING PERSONAL TRAJECTORIES AND DRAWING
CAUSAL INFERENCES FROM LONGITUDINAL DATA, Stephen W.
Raudenbush 501
DISRESPECT AND THE EXPERIENCE OF INJUSTICE, Dale T.
Miller 527
HEALTH PSYCHOLOGY: Psychosocial and Biobehavioral Aspects of
Chronic Disease Management, Neil Schneiderman, Michael H. Antoni,
Patrice G. Saab, Gail Ironson 555
DECISION TECHNOLOGY, W. Edwards, B. Fasolo 581
EVOLUTIONARY PSYCHOLOGY: Toward a Unifying Theory and a
Hybrid Science, Linnda R. Caporael 607
ATTENTION AND PERFORMANCE, Harold Pashler, James C.
Johnston, Eric Ruthruff 629
PROBLEMS FOR JUDGMENT AND DECISION MAKING, R. Hastie
653
View publication stats

Controversies and Evidence, Dianne L. Chambless, Thomas H. Ollendick
EMPIRICALLY SUPPORTED PSYCHOLOGICAL INTERVENTIONS:
685

Ajzen 20 Attitude 20 Theory 20 Ann Rev Psy 202001

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Ajzen 20 Attitude 20 Theory 20 Ann Rev Psy 202001

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Ajzen 20 Attitude 20 Theory 20 Ann Rev Psy 202001

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

Nature and Operation of Attitudes

Article in Annual Review of Psychology · February 2001

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Annu. Rev. Psychol. 2001. 52:27–58

NATURE AND OPERATION OF ATTITUDES

Key Words belief, evaluation, attitude strength, accessibility,

Moderators of Attitude-Behavior Consistency . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42

The attitude construct continues to be a major focus of theory and research in

Evaluation Versus Affect

ATTITUDE FORMATION AND ACTIVATION

The Expectancy-Value Model

assigns equal weights to all belief-value products. Following up on a study by

participants with a promotion focus, but a negative coefficient for participants

Automatic Attitude Activation

Affect Versus Cognition as Antecedents of Evaluation

Affective Primacy It is well established that repeated exposure to novel stimuli

by low-level affective processes, low-level cognitive processes, or both may not

more easily accessible in memory.

Negativity Bias Whether cognitive or affective in nature, it is well known that

strated by research regarding the effects of positive and negative information on

characteristics they possess or desirable characteristics they do not possess. A

con beliefs produced a corresponding difference in attitudes when three beliefs

said to be relatively stable over time, to be resistant to persuasion, and to predict

manifest behavior. Visser & Krosnick (1998) documented changes in attitude

Consequences of Attitude Strength

Strong attitudes are, among other things, expected to be relatively resistant to

progress. Attitude strength has been operationalized in different ways, including

Generally speaking, ambivalence reflects the co-existence of positive and negative

experiments confirmed these expectations: Attitudes of participants provided with

In the broadest sense of functionality, attitudes facilitate adaptation to the envi-

Biasing Effects of Attitudes If attitudes serve a variety of functions for the

function of values continues (see Seligman et al 1996). It has been suggested

Moderators of Attitude-Behavior Consistency

effect of involvement. In one experiment (Kokkinaki & Lunt 1997), involvement

Theories of Reasoned Action and Planned Behavior

Applications Many investigators continue to demonstrate the applicability of

(Rise et al 1998), exposing oneself to sunlight (Hillhouse et al 1997), and com-

Perceived Behavioral Control Going beyond the demonstration of applicabil-

subjective norms, whereas only attitudes significantly predicted the intentions

of men (Grogan et al 1997). Finally, the readiness of managers to undertake

From Intentions to Actions

Implementation Intentions In an impressive program of research, Gollwitzer

initiation of goal-directed responses becomes automatized following formation

of implementation intentions, i.e. intentions to perform a goal-directed behavior

this aspect of attitudes. Nevertheless, some interesting conclusions emerged: It

Visit the Annual Reviews home page at www.AnnualReviews.org

ing perceptions of control from self-efficacy: Soc. Psychol. 71:637–53

Attitudes. Fort Worth, TX: Harcourt Brace 16:233–40

processing and attitude-intention consis- tributes in attitude judgments. J. Pers. Soc.

vertisements affect voter’s perceptions of the 1996, pp. 107–33

Psychol. 28:1903–15 of planned behavior and smoking cessation.

differences perspective on assessing cog- schoolboy cyclists: a comparison of the the-

mismatching attitude functions: implications We Evaluate: Functions of Attitudes, ed. G

Soc. Psychol. Bull. 24:227–40 Erlbaum

Soc. Psychol. 72:492–96 attitudes. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 76:517–32

attitudes. J. Abnorm. Soc. Psychol. 26:249– J. Soc. Psychol. 27:539–60

SENTENCE AND TEXT COMPREHENSION: Roles of Linguistic

Structure, Charles Clifton Jr., Susan A. Duffy 167