Suchergebnisse

Summary: Two studies were conducted to test the hypothesis that stronger degrees of ambivalence attenuate the attitude-behavior correspondence. We also tested the hypothesis that the weaker attitude-behavior correspondence at higher levels of ambivalence may be due to the lower temporal stability of highly ambivalent attitudes. To ensure that these hypotheses be adequately tested, both studies had a prospective design. After assessing their attitudes toward certain behaviors and ambivalence, participants recorded how often they performed these behaviors during the subsequent 14-day period. The investigated behaviors included everyday behaviors such as consuming fast food, preparing classes, and watching entertaining programs on TV. To assess attitudinal stability, attitudes were measured again after the 14-day period. As the results show, the expected moderating effect of experienced ambivalence on the attitude-behavior correspondence was obtained, however, only for a minority of the investigated behaviors. As predicted, experienced ambivalence was related to decreased attitudinal stability in each of these cases. A meta-analytic summary of the two studies revealed that, across different behaviors, a weak but reliable moderating effect of ambivalence on attitude stability and the correspondence between attitudes and behaviors exists.

We introduce a single-item implicit measure of global self-esteem. The measure is based on the mere-ownership effect and asks participants to indicate how much they like their name. Six studies attested to the validity of this measure. In addition to showing high test–retest reliability (r = .85), the studies found that Name-Liking was (a) unrelated to impression management, (b) positively related to the Name-Letter-Task, the Self-Esteem IAT, explicit self-esteem measures, and self-reported subjective well-being, (c) more strongly related to explicit measures of global than domain-specific self-esteem, (d) more strongly related to self-esteem judgments made spontaneously as well as under cognitive load, and (e) predicted observer-reported anxiety during an anxiety-inducing interview whereas an explicit measure of self-esteem did not.