Discuss The Concept That Attitude And Opinion Change Were Co

Discuss The Concept That Attitude And Opinion Change Were Considered T

Attitude and opinion change have historically been viewed as measures of personal stability because they were assumed to be enduring over time. This perspective was rooted in early communication and social psychology theories, notably those developed by researchers such as Carl Hovland, Irwin Janis, and others. These scholars posited that attitudes and opinions reflect deep-seated beliefs or preferences, which tend to be relatively stable unless influenced by significant persuasive efforts. They believed that attitude change was not superficial but represented genuine shifts in personal cognition and affect, which could be reliably measured and analyzed through specific steps—attention, comprehension, and acceptance (Hovland, Janis, & Kelley, 1953). This assumption of stability underpinned much of the early research in persuasion and attitude change, framing these processes as indicators of enduring personal transformation.

However, contemporary research challenges the notion that attitudes and opinions are inherently stable and enduring. Modern perspectives recognize that attitudes and opinions are dynamic and context-dependent, influenced by social, cultural, and psychological factors (Petty & Cacioppo, 1986). The advent of media studies, social network analysis, and behavioral psychology has shown that attitudes can be fluid and susceptible to short-term influences, often fluctuating with new information, social interactions, or environmental cues. For example, the minimal effects theory suggests that mass media and persuasion campaigns rarely result in permanent attitude change; instead, they tend to reinforce existing beliefs or cause temporary shifts (Lazarsfeld, Berelson, & Gaudet, 1944).

In addition, the rise of two-step flow communication models highlights the significance of opinion leaders and interpersonal influence over direct media effects. This suggests that attitudes are shaped more through social interaction and endorsement by trusted individuals rather than solely through mass media messages (Katz & Lazarsfeld, 1955). As a result, the assumption of enduring change becomes less tenable because attitudes may not necessarily reflect deep-seated convictions but rather transient social alignments or immediate responses. Moreover, the complex nature of individual differences, such as personality traits, prior knowledge, and motivation, further complicates the idea that attitudes are inherently stable (Petty & Cacioppo, 1984). Therefore, in today’s media environment characterized by rapid information exchange and social networking, the assumption that attitude and opinion change are enduring is largely outdated. Instead, current research emphasizes the fluidity and situational nature of attitudes, recognizing that they can change relatively quickly and sometimes revert to prior states (Rosenberg & Hovland, 1960).

In conclusion, while early theories regarded attitude and opinion change as measures of enduring personal traits, contemporary scholarship highlights their transient and context-sensitive nature. The recognition that attitudes can fluctuate over short periods has profound implications for understanding persuasion, political communication, marketing, and social influence. This shift from viewing attitude change as a sign of deep, stable transformation to understanding it as a phenomenon dependent on social context and individual differences reflects ongoing developments in communication and social psychology (Ajzen, 1991). It suggests that strategies aiming to influence attitudes must consider their inherent variability and the multitude of factors that facilitate or inhibit change.

Paper For Above instruction

Attitudes and opinions have long been central constructs in understanding human behavior, especially in the realms of persuasion, social influence, and communication. Traditionally, these constructs were viewed as stable and enduring reflections of personal beliefs and preferences. The assumption was that a change in attitude or opinion was a significant indicator of genuine personal transformation, worthy of measurement and analysis. This perspective was particularly dominant in the early to mid-20th century, driven by foundational theories and models of communication and social psychology that emphasized the stability of these personal attributes.

Early scholars such as Carl Hovland, Irwin Janis, and Harold Kelley played pivotal roles in conceptualizing attitude and opinion change as enduring. Their research was rooted in the belief that attitudes, once formed, tend to remain consistent unless influenced by compelling persuasive efforts. Hovland, Kelly, and Janis (1953) articulated a process whereby attitude change occurs through attention, comprehension, and acceptance of messages. According to their model, individuals are more likely to be persuaded when they focus on relevant information, understand it clearly, and accept it as valid. This process was thought to reflect a deep, enduring shift in personal beliefs or evaluations.

The foundational assumption of stability was reinforced by the Lasswell model of communication, which describes communication as a process involving 'who says what to whom with what effect' (Lasswell, 1948). Early research sought causal links between persuasive messages and long-term attitude change, often aiming to predict and influence individual behaviors. Such studies assumed that once a person’s attitude shifts, it remains relatively stable over time, making attitude change a reliable measure of personal or societal transformation (Lazarsfeld, Berelson, & Gaudet, 1944).

However, this traditional view has been challenged extensively by later research. The minimal effects model, for example, argues that mass media influence on attitude change is limited and often overstated in earlier theories. Studies such as Lazarsfeld's “People’s Choice” (1944) and the “Revere Project” (Lazarsfeld et al., 1948) demonstrated that the media's influence is often indirect, primarily reinforcing existing beliefs through opinion leaders rather than directly altering attitudes. These findings suggested that attitude and opinion change are more complex and less enduring than previously thought, often serving as temporary responses within social networks rather than lasting transformations.

Modern communication theories have shifted focus from the idea of a passive, unchanging individual to an active, socially embedded actor. The two-step flow model illustrates that individuals are influenced by opinion leaders who interpret and relay media messages within their social circles (Katz & Lazarsfeld, 1955). This process emphasizes interpersonal communication and social influence as pivotal mechanisms in shaping attitudes, which are now understood as more fluid and context-dependent. Accordingly, attitudes are frequently subjected to short-term fluctuations driven by social pressures, new information, or situational factors, undermining the earlier assumption of their enduring nature.

Furthermore, the development of the theory of diffusion of innovations by Everett Rogers (1962) underscores that attitude change, especially in the context of adopting new ideas or technologies, occurs gradually over time through interpersonal channels. Rogers proposed that individual adoption of innovations involves multiple stages—awareness, interest, evaluation, trial, and adoption—and that the initial medium (mass media, interpersonal communication, direct experience) influences the speed but not necessarily the permanence of attitude change. Indeed, the diffusion process is often characterized by variation among individuals and groups, with some maintaining resistant attitudes despite interventions.

Research on persuasion and attitude change also highlights that attitudes are susceptible to transient influences. For example, negative appeals or fear-based messages may produce short-term compliance but do not guarantee lasting change (Leventhal et al., 1965). Instead, the persistence of attitude change depends on factors such as message credibility, emotional involvement, and reinforcement through social networks (Petty & Cacioppo, 1986). This demonstrates that attitude and opinion change today cannot be solely attributed to media messages; rather, they are embedded within a complex web of personal, social, and contextual factors that influence their stability.

In conclusion, the old assumption that attitude and opinion change are measures of enduring personal traits is increasingly outdated in light of contemporary research. Attitudes are now recognized as dynamic, context-sensitive constructs that can change rapidly and often revert to prior states. This understanding has profound implications for designing persuasive communication campaigns, stakeholder engagement strategies, and media literacy programs. Recognizing the fluid nature of attitudes emphasizes the importance of ongoing interaction, social influence, and contextual factors in shaping human beliefs and behaviors over time (Rosenberg & Hovland, 1960; Ajzen, 1991).

References

• Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179-211.
• Hovland, C. I., Janis, I. L., & Kelley, H. H. (1953). Communication and persuasion; psychological studies of opinion change.
• Katz, E., & Lazarsfeld, P. F. (1955). Personal influence: The part played by people in the flow of mass communication. Free Press.
• Lazarsfeld, P. F., Berelson, B., & Gaudet, H. (1944). The people's choice: How the voter makes up his mind in a presidential campaign. Columbia University Press.
• Lasswell, H. D. (1948). The structure and function of communication in society. In L. Bryson (Ed.), The political life of Truman (pp. 62-72). Knopf.
• Leventhal, H., Watts, S. E., & Pagano, R. R. (1965). Effects of message framing and source credibility on attitudes and behaviors concerning smoking. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2(5), 524-529.
• Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1984). The elaboration likelihood model of persuasion. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 17, 1-62.
• Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1986). Communication and persuasion: Central and peripheral routes to attitude change. Springer-Verlag.
• Rogers, E. M. (1962). Diffusion of innovations. Free Press.
• Rosenberg, M. J., & Hovland, C. I. (1960). Cognitive, affective, and behavioral components of attitude. Psychosomatic Medicine, 22(4), 256-269.