Attitudes vs Actions: Why We Don't Always Do What We Say - Research Paper Example

Attitudes vs Action: Why we don’t always do what we say? (I)The main point of the research article is men often do not do what they actually say they would, and that is determined by their prejudice and other social factors. The natural retort to the question is if we always did what we said or proclaimed, the world would be too full of the likes of Barrack Obama, Brad Pitt, Alexander or William Shakespeare, as that is what most of us, in childhood nonchalance, say we would become. This clearly underlines the fact that while attitude, and especially a positive one, is a good driver of thoughts and may contribute to the making of one’s values and behavior, is not necessarily the determiner of a man’s action. (II) For example, when the hoteliers were asked in a questionnaire whether they would accommodate Chinese guests, they gave a certain set of negative answers.

But after a period of time, when they were confronted with the same question, there were wide discrepencies in their responses. This again proves that they themselves are not sure what their exact behavior would be in the given situation. Hence once again, their behavior cannot be said to be the outcome of their attitude, which has varied during the two occasions when they were asked about whether they would entertain Chinese guests. On the other hand, their actual disposition, hence their actual attitude towards the Chinese guest can be discerned only when that situation actually arrives, and from how they respond then.

Which is to say their behavior is more likely to be the determiner of their attitude and not vice versa. (III) In support of the stance, I like to also discuss Pavlov’s classical conditioning theory, that is often quoted by behaviorists who lean for behavior first hypothesis. Pavlov applied meat paste with a bell until the dogs’ salivated. Afterwards, when the bell was rung, the dogs would start to salivate. However, when the paste was removed and the bell was rung without the paste, the dogs still salivated, because the dogs were conditioned to get the meat paste with the bell.

Therefore, it is called a conditioned response. The dogs learned to associate the bell ringing with food. This experiment paired a stimulus that does not normally produce a response, which a stimulus that is known to product a response. This is also used by marketers to attract people because people associate their responses to certain stimuli (known as a cue) and marketers can use these cues to influence consumer buying behavior (LaPiere, 2003). (IV) Next comes Festinger’s Theory of Cognitive Dissonance (Schiffman, Kanuk, and Kumar, 2010).

According to it, discomfort occurs when a consumer holds conflicting thoughts about a belief or an attitude object. For instance, when consumers have made a commitment- made a down payment or placed an order for a product, especially an expensive one, they often begin to feel cognitive dissonance when they think about the unique, positive qualities of the brands not selected. Since they cannot change what they have already purchased, they begin to change their attitude about the object purchased in order to get rid of the discomforting feel that they were having when they thought the purchased item is inferior to the other brands.

This again shows that the behavior (what they purchased) came first, and attitude (their opinion about the purchased article) was moulded accordingly. (V) Again, although those who advocate the theory of reasoned action say that every action is the outcome of reason or thought, they have been criticized for their postulate on grounds that they do not take into account social factors like the prejudice around us, or the obligation to conform to norms (Theory of Reason Action and Theory of Planned Behaviour).

Especially the obligation to conform to norms is an important determinant of our actions. We may say we would love to do certain things, but when we relate our desire to the social context, thinking whether they will get social sanction or not, and come to the conclusion that they will not, we may pull back from actually doing them. (VI) Yet again why we don’t always do what we say can be assessed in the context of the freedom of thoughts but limitation of action. When we think about undertaking an adventure or some other responsibility, there is nothing binding that thought, as thoughts often tend to ignore or down play practicalities.

But, when we want to go ahead with the determined action, the practicalities come in way of us, and we often realize that we are either not capable of doing the particular work or, we do not have the necessary faculties available to make it possible. (VII) Overall, I guess behavior precedes attitude, and the simplest example of that even at schools, whenever we are evaluated for our attitude, it is evaluated in the context of our behavior or how we have conducted ourselves, and not vice versa.

Reference LaPiere, R.T., 1934, Attitudes vs. Actions, Social ForcesSharp, B., 2003, The Lecture Notes, Buyer & Consumer Behaviour University of South Australia. Adelaide. Schiffman, L.G., Knauk, L.L.. and, Kumar, S.Ramesh, 2010. Consumer Behaviour: Pearson. Print. Theory of Reasoned Action and Theory of Planned Behaviour. [http://systemscraft.wordpress.com/2009/12/30/theory-of-reasoned-action-tra-and-theory-of-planned-behavior-tpb/]