Judging Groups and Society 1
Reading Summary: Judging Groups and Society: Generalization and Individualization
Shaneil A. Guidry
School of Psychology, Liberty University
Judging Groups and Society: Generalization and Individualization
In our society today the term “attitude” often carries a negative connotation and not an
individual's response to a particular situation or object; good or bad. When hearing the word
“attitude” it is often assumed that an individual is difficult, unpleasant, and one to avoid.
However, it individuals truly take a moment to understand where attitudes derive from, it would
better assist with understanding the behavior of those around them. Seventy years and
Judging Groups and Society 2
counting, researchers are continuously seeking to understand attitude formation and are still
developing new understandings in the process.
Researchers such as Winkielman and Cacioppo brings clarity to the discussion by offering
a greater understanding that there is indeed a difference between attitude formation and
attitude change. “It must be emphasized that mere exposure and conditioning are concerned
with attitude formation, not change” (Crano & Prislin, pg. 348, 2006). There are research
findings that indicate the foundational makeup of an individual’s attitude is that of their
environment and experiences. Many researchers have concluded that variables such as
environment and experiences are great influences on individuals’ overall attitude. Early
childhood (environment and experiences contributes to how attitude may be persuaded by
various objects and encounters in the future.
Dissonance Theory
Fiske and Taylor present to readers that individuals will go out of their way to connect
with others and objects that will validates their attitude in order to avoid their attitude being
challenged or interrupted. According to Fiske and Taylor, theorists have identified various
approaches in which individuals safeguard their attitude and put into action the dissonance
theory. “Dissonance theory in particular predicts that people will avoid information that
increases dissonance; that is, people favor information consistent with their attitudes and
behavior” (Fiske & Taylor, pg. 262, 2021). The three difference perceptions that work along side
of the dissonance theory are selective exposure, selective attention, and selective
interpretation.
Selective Perceptions
Selective perception presents opportunities that enables individuals to validate or
reinforce their attitude. Researchers identified selective exposure as one of the selective
perceptions. Selective exposure indicates that individuals seek out similar environments,
Judging Groups and Society 3
likeminded individuals, and even relatable entertainment that reinforce their attitude. “Most of
us inhabit an environment biased in favor of congenial positions (Sears, 1968)” (Fiske & Taylor,
pg.
263, 2021).
Next, there is selective attention. Consistency plays a major role in selective attention.
Individual natural seeking out consistency, as it offers a sense of stability and even a level of
comfort. When inconsistency presents itself, uncertainty followed by questions of concern can
then be expected. “Selective attention clearly responds to consistency pressures. People often
look longer at consistent than inconsistent evidence (Brock & Balloun, 1967; A. R. Cohen,
Brehm, & Latané, 1959; Jecker, 1964)” (Fiske & Taylor, pg. 263, 2021).
Lastly, there is selective interpretation. One’s attitude can heavily influence an
individual’s interpretation on just about any subject matter. Selective interpretation is what
some researchers consider an additional way of protecting one’s attitude. When presented with
information, individuals will obtain the information, however, the obtain information will be
measure according to the attitude of the individual. Fiske and Taylor utilize politics to bring a
better understanding of this perception. A political candidate can present their speech and the
constituent can pull from that speech what they believe to be strong arguments just because of
their like for that candidate. The attitude of the constituent can translate or interpret a
completely different perspective than the one that is actually presented.
Conclusion
When it comes to the social cognitive definition of attitudes, researchers do not deny
that there is still so much to understand and obtaining that understanding can possibly take an
additional seventy years. While continuously debating over the fact that the attitudes of
humankind may be the hypothetical constructs that psychologists developed or whether our
attitudes are driven by corresponds to a specifiable state within our brain, there is no debate
Judging Groups and Society 4
that this discussion needs to continue to be had. “These two views therefore require conceptual
discussion about representation, process, and system, and cannot be decided simply from
evidence of contextual variability in observed attitudes” (Ferguson & Fukukura, pg. 21, 2012).
The mystery of our social cognition keeps the mental wheels spinning and research
wondering just how we derive to the many cognitive states that makes up our social cognition.
Unfortunately, we are continuously eluded by the design of humankind mental components.
However, this being eluded only motivates researcher, theorists, and psychologists even more to
continue to seek out answers to the continuous list of questions generated by new findings. God
often reminds us of obtaining understanding and to obtain it with Him in mind. When we allow
ourselves to be guided by Christ, we begin to grasp hold to a clarity that we could not otherwise
possess. “Blessed is the one who finds wisdom, and the one who gets understanding” (English
Standard Version, 2024, Provb. 3:13).
References
Crano, W. D., & Prislin, R. (2006). Attitudes and Persuasion. Annual Review of
Psychology, 57(1), 345–374. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.57.102904.190034
English Standard Version Bible. (2024). ESVB Online. https://biblegateway.com/
Ferguson, M., & Fukukura, J. (2012). Likes and dislikes: a social cognitive perspective on
attitudes. In The SAGE Handbook of Social Cognition (pp. 165-190). SAGE Publications Ltd,
https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446247631
Fiske, S. T., & Taylor, S. E. (2021). Social Cognition: From Brains to Culture. SAGE
Publications Ltd.
