The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Biased Processing as a Function of Attitude Accessibility: Making Objective Judgments Subjectively
Abstract
The effect of attitude accessibility on the evaluation of attitude relevant information was examined. In Experiment 1, attitudes toward a contemporary public issue (capital punishment) and the accessibility of those attitudes, as indicated by latency of response to the attitudinal inquiry, were measured. Attitude accessibility was found to moderate the extent of the relation between attitudes and judgments of such information. Biased processing was more evident for individuals with highly accessible attitudes than for those with less accessible attitudes. Experiment 2 tested the causal role of attitude accessibility. Accessibility was manipulated by having subjects express their attitudes either a single time (low accessibility) or repeatedly (high accessibility). As in Experiment 1, attitude accessibility moderated the relation between attitudes and judgments. The implications of these findings for the processing of attitude-relevant information and attitude stability over time are discussed.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Lord, C. G., Ross, L., & Lepper, M. R. (1979) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.37.11.2098 · Cited by 4,583
Hastorf, A. H., & Cantril, H. (1954) · The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/h0057880 · Cited by 882
Cited by
Extending the Theory of Planned Behavior: A Review and Avenues for Further Research
Conner, M., & Armitage, C. J. (1998) · Journal of Applied Social Psychology · doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816.1998.tb01685.x · Cited by 3,344
Ironic processes of mental control.
Wegner, D. M. (1994) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037//0033-295x.101.1.34 · Cited by 2,609
Framing as a Theory of Media Effects
Scheufele, D. A. (1999) · Journal of Communication · doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.1999.tb02784.x · Cited by 2,179
Wilson, T. D., Lindsey, S., & Schooler, T. Y. (2000) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.107.1.101 · Cited by 2,112
Multiple Processes by which Attitudes Guide Behavior: The Mode Model as an Integrative Framework
Fazio, R. H. (1990) · Advances in Experimental Social Psychology · doi:10.1016/s0065-2601(08)60318-4 · Cited by 2,002
Metadata
- Authors
- Houston, D. A., & Fazio, R. H.
- Venue
- Social Cognition
- Publisher
- Guilford Publications
- Published
- 1989-03
- Volume
- 7
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 51-66
- ISSN
- 0278-016X (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1989610764
- Cited by
- 223
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 29.68
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Biased Processing as a Function of Attitude Accessibility: Making Objective Judgments Subjectively. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1521/soco.1989.7.1.51
- The paper
- Houston, D. A., & Fazio, R. H. (1989). Biased Processing as a Function of Attitude Accessibility: Making Objective Judgments Subjectively. Social Cognition. https://doi.org/10.1521/soco.1989.7.1.51
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
