CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 798Social and Intergroup PsychologyPsychometric Methodologies and TestingBehavioral Health and Interventions

Attitudes as Object–Evaluation Associations of Varying Strength

Open access
Fazio, Russell H.·2007·Social Cognition
DOI 10.1521/soco.2007.25.5.603PMC PMC2677817
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Historical developments regarding the attitude concept are reviewed, and set the stage for consideration of a theoretical perspective that views attitude, not as a hypothetical construct, but as evaluative knowledge. A model of attitudes as object-evaluation associations of varying strength is summarized, along with research supporting the model's contention that at least some attitudes are represented in memory and activated automatically upon the individual's encountering the attitude object. The implications of the theoretical perspective for a number of recent discussions related to the attitude concept are elaborated. Among these issues are the notion of attitudes as "constructions," the presumed malleability of automatically-activated attitudes, correspondence between implicit and explicit measures of attitude, and postulated dual or multiple attitudes.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1521/soco.2007.25.5.603

Cites

11 of 11 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Issues that have not necessarily been extensively moralized (e.g., recycling) may allow for the most flexible evaluations and lead to the largest differences between moral and non-moral evaluative modes.

    “it seems likely that issues that have not necessarily been extensively moralized (e.g., recycling) may allow for the most flexible evaluations and lead to the largest differences between moral and non-moral evaluative modes [70].”

    From The Importance of Moral Construal: Moral versus Non-Moral Construal Elicits Faster, More Extreme, Universal Evaluations of the Same Actions (2012) · cites this paper as [70]

    The Background (page unavailable) describes context-dependent evaluations and reports that some people’s views of environmentalism shifted after recalling ecology-related behaviors. It does not say that recycling is less moralized or that such issues produce the largest differences between moral and non-moral evaluative modes. (LLM, conf=0.78)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Deliberate evaluations on direct measures are influenced by response-related factors that do not affect spontaneous evaluations on indirect measures to the same extent, so dissociations between the two kinds of measures may be driven by these response-related factors rather than lack of awareness.

    “deliberate evaluations on direct measures are influenced by various response-related factors that do not affect spontaneous evaluations on indirect measures to the same extent (Fazio 2007, Gawronski & Bodenhausen 2006). Thus, dissociations between the two kinds of measures may be driven by any of these response-related factors rather than by lack of awareness.”

    From Unawareness of Attitudes, Their Environmental Causes, and Their Behavioral Effects (2025) · cites this paper as Fazio 2007

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 98

  1. Allport GW. Attitudes. In: Murchison C, editor. Handbook of social psychology. Worcester, Mass.: Clark University Press; 1935. pp. 798–844. [Google Scholar]
  2. Asch SE. The doctrine of suggestion, prestige, and imitation in social psychology. Psychological Review. 1948;55:250–276. doi: 10.1037/h0057270. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  3. Banaji MR. Implicit attitudes can be measured. In: Roediger HL III, Nairne JS, Neath I, Surprenant A, editors. The nature of remembering: Essays in honor of Robert G. Crowder. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association; 2001. pp. 117–150. [Google Scholar]
  4. Bargh JA. The four horsemen of automaticity: Awareness, intention, efficiency, and control in social cognition. In: Wyer RS, Srull TK, editors. Handbook of social cognition. Vol. 1. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum; 1994. pp. 1–40. [Google Scholar]
  5. Barden J, Maddux WW, Petty RE, Brewer MB. Contextual moderation of racial bias: The impact of social roles on controlled and automatically activated attitudes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 2004;87:5–22. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.87.1.5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  6. Bassili JN. Meta-judgmental versus operative indexes of psychological attributes : The case of measure of attitude strength. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1996;71:637–653. [Google Scholar]
  7. Bassili JN, Fletcher JF. Response-time measurement in survey research: A method for CATI and a new look at nonattitudes. Public Opinion Quarterly. 1991;55:331–346. [Google Scholar]
  8. Blascovich J, Ernst JM, Tomaka J, Kelsey RM, Salomon KL, Fazio RH. Attitude accessibility as a moderator of autonomic reactivity during decision making. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1993;64:165–176. doi: 10.1037//0022-3514.64.2.165. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  9. Briñol P, Petty RE, Tormala ZL. The malleable meaning of subjective ease. Psychological Science. 2006;17:200–206. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01686.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  10. Bruner JS. On perceptual readiness. Psychological Review. 1957;64:123–152. doi: 10.1037/h0043805. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  11. Carlston DE, Skowronski J. Linking versus thinking: Evidence for the different associative and attributional bases of spontaneous trait transference and spontaneous trait inference. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 2005;89:884–898. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.89.6.884. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  12. Chaiken S, Baldwin MW. Affective-cognitive consistency and the effect of salient behavioral information on the self-perception of attitudes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1981;41:1–12. [Google Scholar]
  13. Converse PE. Attitudes and non-attitudes: Continuation of a dialogue. In: Tufte ER, editor. The quantitative analysis of social problems. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley; 1970. pp. 168–189. [Google Scholar]
  14. Dasgupta N, Greenwald AG. On the malleability of automatic attitudes: Combating automatic prejudice with images of admired and disliked individuals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 2001;81:800–814. doi: 10.1037//0022-3514.81.5.800. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  15. DeFleur ML, Westie FR. Attitude as a scientific concept. Social Forces. 1963;42:17–31. [Google Scholar]
  16. De Houwer J, Thomas S, Baeyens F. Associative learning of likes and dislikes: A review of 25 years of research on human evaluative conditioning. Psychological Bulletin. 2001;127:853–869. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.127.6.853. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI · Paper page
  17. Deutsch R, Strack F. Duality models in social psychology: From dual processes to interacting systems. Psychological Inquiry. 2006;17:166–172. [Google Scholar]
  18. Duckworth KL, Bargh JA, Garcia M, Chaiken S. The automatic evaluation of novel stimuli. Psychological Science. 2002;13:513–519. doi: 10.1111/1467-9280.00490. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  19. Eiser JR, Fazio RH, Stafford T, Prescott TJ. Connectionist simulation of attitude learning: Asymmetries in the acquisition of positive and negative evaluations. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. 2003;29:1221–1235. doi: 10.1177/0146167203254605. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  20. Eiser JR, Stafford T, Fazio RH. How negative attitudes resist change: A connectionist account of the consequences of global and targeted expectancies. University of Sheffield; 2007. Unpublished manuscript. [Google Scholar]
  21. Fabrigar L, Petty RE, Smith SM, Crites SL. Understanding knowledge effects on attitude-behavior consistency: The role of relevance, complexity, and amount of knowledge. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 2006;90:556–577. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.90.4.556. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  22. Fazio RH. How do attitudes guide behavior? In: Sorrentino RM, Higgins ET, editors. The Handbook of motivation and cognition: Foundations of social behavior. New York: Guilford Press; 1986. pp. 204–243. [Google Scholar]
  23. Fazio RH. Multiple processes by which attitudes guide behavior: The MODE model as an integrative framework. In: Zanna MP, editor. Advances in experimental social psychology. Vol. 23. New York: Academic Press; 1990. pp. 75–109. [Google Scholar]
  24. Fazio RH. Attitudes in associated systems theory. In: Wyer RS, editor. Advances in Social Cognition. VII. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum; 1994. pp. 157–167. [Google Scholar]
  25. Fazio RH. Attitudes as object-evaluation associations: Determinants, consequences, and correlates of attitude accessibility. In: Petty RE, Krosnick JA, editors. Attitude strength: Antecedents and consequences. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum; 1995. pp. 247–282. [Google Scholar]
  26. Fazio RH. Accessible attitudes as tools for object appraisal: Their costs and benefits. In: Maio G, Olson J, editors. Why we evaluate: Functions of attitudes. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum; 2000. pp. 1–36. [Google Scholar]
  27. Fazio RH. On the automatic activation of associated evaluations: An overview. Cognition and Emotion. 2001;15:115–141. [Google Scholar]
  28. Fazio RH, Blascovich J, Driscoll DM. On the functional value of attitudes: The influence of accessible attitudes upon the ease and quality of decision making. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. 1992;18:388–401. [Google Scholar]
  29. Fazio RH, Chen J, McDonel EC, Sherman SJ. Attitude accessibility, attitude-behavior consistency and the strength of the object-evaluation association. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology. 1982;18:339–357. [Google Scholar]
  30. Fazio RH, Dunton BC. Categorization by race: The impact of automatic and controlled components of racial prejudice. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology. 1997;33:451–470. [Google Scholar]
  31. Fazio RH, Eiser JR, Shook NJ. Attitude formation through exploration: Valence asymmetries. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 2004;87:293–311. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.87.3.293. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  32. Fazio RH, Herr PM, Olney T. Attitude accessibility following a self-perception process. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1984;47:277–286. doi: 10.1037//0022-3514.47.2.277. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  33. Fazio RH, Ledbetter JE, Towles-Schwen T. On the costs of accessible attitudes: Detecting that the attitude object has changed. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 2000;78:197–210. doi: 10.1037//0022-3514.78.2.197. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI · Paper page
  34. Fazio RH, Olson MA. Attitudes: Foundations, functions, and consequences. In: Hogg MA, Cooper J, editors. The Sage Handbook of Social Psychology. London: Sage; 2003a. pp. 139–160. [Google Scholar]
  35. Fazio RH, Olson MA. Implicit measures in social cognition research: Their meaning and use. Annual Review of Psychology. 2003b;54:297–327. doi: 10.1146/annurev.psych.54.101601.145225. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  36. Fazio RH, Powell MC, Herr PM. Toward a process model of the attitude-behavior relation: Accessing one’s attitude upon mere observation of the attitude object. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1983;44:723–735. [Google Scholar]
  37. Fazio RH, Roskos-Ewoldsen DR. Acting as we feel: When and how attitudes guide behavior. In: Brock TC, Green MC, editors. Persuasion: Psychological insights and perspectives. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage; 2005. pp. 41–62. [Google Scholar]
  38. Fazio RH, Sanbonmatsu DM, Powell MC, Kardes FR. On the automatic activation of attitudes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1986;50:229–238. doi: 10.1037//0022-3514.50.2.229. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  39. Fazio RH, Towles-Schwen T. The MODE model of attitude-behavior processes. In: Chaiken S, Trope Y, editors. Dual process theories in social psychology. New York: Guilford; 1999. pp. 97–116. [Google Scholar]
  40. Fazio RH, Williams CJ. Attitude accessibility as a moderator of the attitude-perception and attitude-behavior relations: An investigation of the 1984 presidential election. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1986;51:505–514. doi: 10.1037//0022-3514.51.3.505. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  41. Ferguson MJ. On the automatic evaluation of end-states. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 2007;92:596–611. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.92.4.596. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  42. Ferguson MJ, Bargh JA. Liking is for doing: The effects of goal pursuit on automatic evaluation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 2004;87:557–572. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.87.5.557. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  43. Ferguson MJ, Bargh JA, Nayak DA. After-affects: How automatic evaluations influence the interpretation of subsequent, unrelated stimuli. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology. 2005;41:182–191. [Google Scholar]
  44. Fishbach A, Friedman RS, Kruglanski AW. Leading us not unto temptation: Momentary allurements elicit overriding goal activation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 2003;84:296–309. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  45. Gawronski B, Bodenhausen GV. Associative and propositional processes in evaluation: An integrative review of implicit and explicit attitude change. Psychological Bulletin. 2006;132:692–731. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.132.5.692. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  46. Gilovich T. Seeing the past in the present: The effect of associations to familiar events on judgments and decisions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1981;40:797–808. [Google Scholar]
  47. Green BF. Attitude measurerment. In: Lindzey G, editor. Handbook of Social Psychology. Cambridge, MA: Addison-Wesley; 1954. pp. 335–369. [Google Scholar]
  48. Greenwald AG, Nosek BA. Attitudinal dissociation: What does it mean? In: Petty RE, Fazio RH, Briñol P, editors. Attitudes: Insights from the new implicit measures. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum; in press. [Google Scholar]
  49. Hamilton DL, Zanna MP. Context effects in impression formation: Changes in connotative meaning. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1974;29:649–654. [Google Scholar]
  50. Han HA, Olson MA, Fazio RH. The influence of experimentally-created extrapersonal associations on the Implicit Association Test. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology. 2006;42:259–272. [Google Scholar]
  51. Hermans D, De Houwer J, Eelen P. A time course analysis of the affective priming effect. Cognition & Emotion. 2001;15:143–165. [Google Scholar]
  52. Higgins ET. Knowledge activation: Accessibility, applicability, and salience. In: Higgins ET, Kruglanski AW, editors. Social psychology: Handbook of basic principles. New York: Guilford Press; 1996. pp. 133–168. [Google Scholar]
  53. Higgins ET, Rholes WS. Impression formation and role fulfillment: A “Holistic Reference” approach. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology. 1976;12:422–435. [Google Scholar]
  54. Hilgard ER. Intervening variables, hypothetical constructs, parameters, and constants. The American Journal of Psychology. 1958;71:238–246. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  55. Hodges SD, Wilson TD. Effects of analyzing reasons on attitude change: The moderating role of attitude accessibility. Social Cognition. 1994;11:353–366. [Google Scholar]
  56. Jarvis WBG, Petty RE. The need to evaluate. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1996;70:172–194. [Google Scholar]
  57. Kaplan KJ. On the ambivalence-indifference problem in attitude theory and measurement: A suggested modification of the semantic differential technique. Psychological Bulletin. 1972;77:361–372. [Google Scholar]
  58. Klauer KC, Musch J. Affective priming: Findings and theories. In: Klauer KC, Musch J, editors. The psychology of evaluation: Affective processes in cognition and emotion. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum; 2003. pp. 7–50. [Google Scholar]
  59. Kruglanski AW. Lay epistemics and human knowledge. New York: Plenum; 1989. [Google Scholar]
  60. Lord CG, Lepper MR. Attitude Representation Theory. In: Zanna MP, editor. Advances in experimental social psychology. Vol. 31. San Diego: Academic Press; 1999. pp. 265–343. [Google Scholar]
  61. Lowery BS, Hardin CD, Sinclair S. Social influence effects on automatic racial prejudice. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 2001;81:842–855. doi: 10.1037//0022-3514.81.5.842. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  62. MacCorquodale K, Meehl E. On a distinction between hypothetical constructs and intervening variables. Psychological Review. 1948;55:95–107. doi: 10.1037/h0056029. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  63. Moors A, De Houwer J. Automaticity: A Theoretical and Conceptual Analysis. Psychological Bulletin. 2006;132:297–326. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.132.2.297. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  64. Newby-Clark IR, McGregor I, Zanna MP. Thinking and caring about cognitive inconsistency: When and for whom does attitudinal ambivalence feel uncomfortable? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 2002;82:157–166. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  65. Olson MA, Fazio RH. Implicit attitude formation through classical conditioning. Psychological Science. 2001;12:413–417. doi: 10.1111/1467-9280.00376. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  66. Olson MA, Fazio RH. Implicit acquisition and manifestation of classically conditioned attitudes. Social Cognition. 2002;20:89–103. [Google Scholar]
  67. Olson MA, Fazio RH. Reducing the influence of extra-personal associations on the Implicit Association Test: Personalizing the IAT. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 2004;86:653–667. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.86.5.653. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  68. Olson MA, Fazio RH. Reducing automatically-activated racial prejudice through implicit evaluative conditioning. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. 2006;32:421–433. doi: 10.1177/0146167205284004. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  69. Petty RE, Haugtvedt C, Smith SM. Elaboration as a determinant of attitude strength: Creating attitudes that are persistent, resistant, and predictive of behavior. In: Petty RE, Krosnick JA, editors. Attitude strength: Antecedents and consequences. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum; 1995. pp. 93–130. [Google Scholar]
  70. Powell MC, Fazio RH. Attitude accessibility as a function of repeated attitudinal expression. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. 1984;10:139–148. [Google Scholar]
  71. Reber R, Winkielman P, Schwarz N. Effects of perceptual fluency on affective judgments. Psychological Science. 1998;9:45–48. [Google Scholar]
  72. Richeson JA, Ambady N. Effects of situational power on automatic racial prejudice. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology. 2003;39:177–183. [Google Scholar]
  73. Rudman LA, Ashmore RD, Gary ML. “Unlearning” automatic biases: The malleability of implicit prejudice stereotypes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 2001;81:856–868. doi: 10.1037//0022-3514.81.5.856. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  74. Rudman LA, Lee MR. Implicit and explicit consequences of exposure to violent and misogynous rap music. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations. 2002;5:133–150. [Google Scholar]
  75. Salancik GR, Conway M. Attitude inferences from salient and relevant cognitive content about behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1975;32:829–840. [Google Scholar]
  76. Sanbonmatsu DM, Fazio RH. The role of attitudes in memory-based decision making. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1990;59:614–622. doi: 10.1037//0022-3514.59.4.614. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  77. Sanbonmatsu DM, Posavac SS, Vanous S, Ho EA, Fazio RH. The deautomatization of accessible attitudes. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology. 2007;43:365–378. [Google Scholar]
  78. Schuman J, Presser S. Questions and answers in attitude surveys: Experiments in question form, wording, and context. New York: Academic Press; 1981. [Google Scholar]
  79. Schwarz N, Bohner G. The construction of attitudes. In: Tesser A, Schwarz N, editors. Blackwell handbook of social psychology: Intraindividual processes. Malden, MA: Blackwell; 2001. pp. 436–457. [Google Scholar]
  80. Seibt B, Hafner M, Deutsch R. Prepared to eat: How immediate affective and motivational responses to food cues are influenced by food deprivation. European Journal of Social Psychology. 2007;37:359–379. [Google Scholar]
  81. Sherman SJ, Rose JS, Koch K, Presson CC, Chassin L. Implicit and explicit attitudes toward cigarette smoking: The effects of context and motivation. Journal of Social & Clinical Psychology. 2003;22:13–39. [Google Scholar]
  82. Shiffrin RM, Dumais ST. The development of automatism. In: Anderson JR, editor. Cognitive skills and their acquisition. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum; 1981. pp. 111–140. [Google Scholar]
  83. Shook NJ, Fazio RH, Eiser JR. Attitude generalization: Similarity, valence, and extremity. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology in press. [Google Scholar]
  84. Sinclair L, Kunda Z. Reactions to a Black professional: Motivated inhibition and activation of conflicting stereotypes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1999;77:885–904. doi: 10.1037//0022-3514.77.5.885. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  85. Smith ER, Fazio RH, Cejka MA. Accessible attitudes influence categorization of multiply categorizable objects. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1996;71:888–898. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  86. Strack F, Martin LL, Stepper S. Inhibiting and facilitating conditions of the human smile: A nonobtrusive test of the facial feedback hypothesis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1988;54:768–777. doi: 10.1037//0022-3514.54.5.768. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI · Paper page
  87. Tetlock PE, Kim I. Accountability and judgment processes in a personality prediction task. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1987;52:700–709. doi: 10.1037//0022-3514.52.4.700. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  88. Thurstone LL. Attitudes can be measured. American Journal of Sociology. 1928;33:529–554. [Google Scholar]
  89. Tourangeau R, Rasinski A. Cognitive processes underlying context effects in attitude measurement. Psychological Bulletin. 1988;103:299–314. [Google Scholar]
  90. Uleman JS. Spontaneous versus intentional inferences in impression formation. In: Chaiken S, Trope Y, editors. Dual-process theories in social psychology. New York: Guilford; 1999. pp. 141–160. [Google Scholar]
  91. Wallace DS, Paulson RM, Lord CG, Bond CF. Which Behaviors Do Attitudes Predict? Meta-Analyzing the Effects of Social Pressure and Perceived Difficulty. Review of General Psychology. 2005;9:214–227. [Google Scholar]
  92. Wicker AW. Attitudes versus actions: The relationship of verbal and overt behavioral responses to attitude objects. Journal of Social Issues. 1969;25:41–78. [Google Scholar]
  93. Wilson TD, Hodges SD, LaFleur SJ. Effects of introspecting about reasons: Inferring attitudes from accessible thoughts. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1995;69:16–28. doi: 10.1037//0022-3514.69.1.16. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  94. Wittenbrink B, Judd CM, Park B. Spontaneous prejudice in context: Variability in automatically activated attitudes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 2001;81:815–827. doi: 10.1037//0022-3514.81.5.815. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  95. Zaller J, Feldman S. American Journal of Political Science. Vol. 36. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum; 1992. A simple theory of the survey response: Answering questions versus revealing preferences; pp. 579–616. [Google Scholar]
  96. Zanna MP, Fazio RH. The attitude-behavior relation: Moving toward a third generation of research. In: Zanna MP, Higgins ET, Herman CP, editors. Consistency in social behavior: The Ontario symposium. Vol. 2. Hillsdale, N.J.: Erlbaum; 1982. pp. 283–301. [Google Scholar]
  97. Zanna MP, Fazio RH, Ross M. The persistence of persuasion. In: Schank RC, Langer E, editors. Beliefs, reasoning, and decision making: Psycho-logic in honor of Bob Abelson. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum; 1994. pp. 347–362. [Google Scholar]
  98. Zanna MP, Rempel JK. Attitudes: A new look at an old concept. In: Bar-Tal D, Kruglanski AW, editors. The Social Psychology of Knowledge. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press; 1988. pp. 315–334. [Google Scholar]

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Fazio, R. H.
Venue
Social Cognition
Publisher
Guilford Publications
Published
2007-10
Volume
25
Issue
5
Pages
603-637
ISSN
0278-016X (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1521/soco.2007.25.5.603
PMC
PMC2677817
OpenAlex
W2047241889
Cited by
798
References
11
Citations by year
2026: 39 · 2025: 31 · 2024: 58 · 2023: 40 · 2022: 59 · 2021: 57 · 2020: 48 · 2019: 44 · 2018: 64 · 2017: 44 · 2016: 48 · 2015: 47 · 2014: 50 · 2013: 43 · 2012: 36
FWCI
73.11
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Social Cognition (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
National Institute of Mental Health (R01MH038832)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social and Intergroup Psychology
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Behavioral Health and Interventions
Keywords
attitudes, evaluative knowledge, automatic activation, implicit attitudes, explicit attitudes, dual-process models

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