Attitude models

If there seems to be some agreement on the constitutive definition of attitude, as well as its characteristics and functions, less agreement exists on the operational definition of attitudes. Since attitudes are an integral part of most consumer behaviour models, consumer behaviour researchers have either endorsed one of the several operational conceptualisations or developed their own operationalisation over time. Four broad attitude operationalisations can be found in the literature: the tripartite (or multi-component) model, the expectancy-value model, the composite model and the two-component model (Figure 3.1). All these models distinguish three basic two-components: belief, affect and conation. However, they disagree in the relations between these constructs (Bodur et al., 2000), in the names given to each component, as well as at times in the

meaning of each component. A brief presentation of each model is described in this section.

Figure 3. 1: The four operationalisations of attitude (Source: Author)

The multicomponent model of attitudes is one of the earliest operationalisations of attitude. This view conceptualises attitudes as comprising cognitive, affective and conative elements (Figure 3.2). The cognitive component comprises the beliefs about the object, that is, the characteristics ascribed to it. The beliefs about the object are multidimensional because they represent the attributes of the object perceived by the consumer. The affective component refers to the consumer’s overall evaluation of the object. Opposite to the cognitive component, the affective component is one dimensional. It can be operationalised as an evaluation from ‘poor’ to ‘excellent’, ‘prefer least’ to ‘prefer most’ or

‘like the least’ to ‘like the most’. The third component of attitude, the conative dimension, is the behavioural response and can take the form of overt actions and verbal statements concerning behaviour (Rosenberg and Hovland, 1960).

In the multicomponent view, all three components (cognition, affect, conation) are integral parts of a certain attitude and hence attitudes consist of various degrees of every component. Up to the 1960’s this view of attitude was adopted almost universally by researchers (Ajzen and Fishbein, 1980). However, in the 1960’s researchers started to criticise this view. The scepticism about the appropriateness of the multicomponent approach was based on the lack of definition as to whether the prediction of behaviour required assessment of all three components or whether it would be sufficient to obtain an index of the conative or behavioural component (Ajzen and Fishbein, 1980). Additionally, the model did not differentiate between overt behaviour and verbal statements concerning

Two-component Two-component Attitude models

Attitude models

Composite Composite Multicomponent

Multicomponent Expectancy- valueExpectancy- value

behaviour. Ajzen and Fishbein (1980) also argued that the separate assessment of all three components of attitude was not likely to lead to improved behavioural prediction.

Figure 3. 2: The multicomponent view of attitudes Source: Rosenberg and Hovland (1960)

An expectancy-value model of attitudes was first introduced by Rosenberg (1956), but it was the work by Fishbein and colleagues (Fishbein, 1963; Fishbein and Ajzen, 1975; Ajzen and Fishbein, 1980) that made this model one of the most used by researchers.

Expectancy-value models postulate that a person’s attitude toward the object is a function of his/her beliefs about the object and the implicit evaluative responses associated with those beliefs. In other words, an attitude toward an object will be determined by its need satisfying ability (expectancy) coupled with the importance of the need for which satisfaction is being sought (value) (Kerby, 1975). Only those beliefs that are readily accessible in memory are expected to influence attitude toward an object (Fishbein and Ajzen, 1975).

Fishbein’s expectancy value model argues for a centrality of beliefs in determining attitude since it posits that attitudes contain only evaluative information (i.e. evaluative beliefs) regarding the object. Unlike the multicomponent model, in the Fishbein model the conative and cognitive components are removed from attitude and are treated as separate concepts that can be related to attitude. This shift was made in order to emphasise the affective component of attitude. Expectancy value models also distinguish between behavioural intentions and actual behaviour, because when dealing with attitudes, the researcher is interested in predispositions. Attitudes are built upon beliefs (associated with

STIMULI

the consequences of performing a given behaviour), whereas behavioural intentions are a function of attitudes.

During the 1960s another model of attitudes was introduced. In general, the composite model of attitude resembles that of expectancy value, but the valence of each evaluative belief is not regarded as necessary. Two different composite models can be identified, one suggested by Rogers (1962) and the other by Howard and Sheth (1969). The composite model was initially put forward by Rogers (1962) within the theory of Diffusion and Adoption of Innovations. Attitude was defined as “a relatively enduring organisation of an individual’s beliefs about an object that predisposes his or her actions” (Rogers, 1995; p. 168). Based on a review of the literature, Rogers (1962, 1995) suggested that the attitude towards an innovation could be assessed by the subjective evaluation of that innovation in terms of five important characteristics: relative advantage, compatibility, complexity, trialability and observability. This subjective evaluation is posited to contain the affective elements associated to the object.

Another composite model of attitude was put forward by Howard and Sheth (1969). They defined attitude (toward a brand) as

“the verbal expression of consumer’s evaluation of a brand or service on a set of bipolar scales defined in terms of the brand’s potential to satisfy the buyer’s motives that are relevant to the purchase of this product class” (p.62).

Two main assumptions are present in this definition. First, because only salient motives are included in the evaluation (i.e. attitude), weighting is considered unnecessary. Second, only the cognitive elements (knowledge) of the brand that are perceived as satisfying motives are used for evaluative purposes and hence only these are regarded as forming attitude. All the other cognitive elements are treated as brand comprehension. Additionally, brand ambiguity, which refers to the confidence with which the evaluation is held, also influences attitude. The general rule is that the less ambiguous is the meaning of the brand to the buyer, the more likely it is to be purchased (if the attitude is positive) or not purchased (if the attitude is negative).

Both the expectancy value and composite models argue for a centrality of beliefs, which is postulated to mediate the effects of affect on attitude. In these models feelings are implicit in attitudes since in this evaluation of the attitudinal object the individual also generates

feelings that are evaluative in nature. Hence, affect is not only assigned a more subordinate theoretical role (Cohen and Areni, 1991), but is also postulated to be a post-information processing (post-cognitive) outcome (Erevelles, 1998).

However, the past two decades have seen many researchers (e.g. Agarwal and Malhotra, 2005; Babin et al., 2004; Bodur et al., 2000; Desai and Mahajan, 1998; Cohen and Areni, 1991; Zana and Rempel, 1988) arguing that feelings, in addition to beliefs, also influence attitude. The two-component model of attitudes suggests that affect has a direct effect in determining attitudes beyond the effect of cognition (Bodur et al., 2000). Under the two-component model, attitude is defined as a summarised evaluative judgement (Agarwal and Malhotra, 2005; Cohen and Areni, 1991), such as whether performing the behaviour is good or bad, and is distinguished from its components, with each component being related to attitude (Engel et al., 1995). Attitude is determined by both the cognitive component (beliefs) and the affective component (feelings such as insecure, entertained and anxious).

Figure 3.3 depicts the two-component model of attitudes.

Figure 3. 3: The two-component model of attitude (Source: Engel et al., 1995)

As this research adopted the multicomponent model of attitude the next three sections review the research on perceived innovation attributes, affective feelings and intention (the choice of this model is explained in Chapter 5, Section 5.4.7). These three components were used in the current research with reference to the cognitive, affective and conative components of attitude, respectively.

Attitudes Attitudes Beliefs

(Cognition) Beliefs (Cognition)

Feelings (Affect) Feelings (Affect)

Behavioural Intention Behavioural

Intention BehaviourBehaviour