Forming attitudes that predict future behavior: a meta-analysis of the attitude-behavior relation

Abstract

A meta-analysis (k of conditions = 128; N = 4,598) examined the influence of factors present at the time an attitude is formed on the degree to which this attitude guides future behavior. The findings indicated that attitudes correlated with a future behavior more strongly when they were easy to recall (accessible) and stable over time. Because of increased accessibility, attitudes more strongly predicted future behavior when participants had direct experience with the attitude object and reported their attitudes frequently. Because of the resulting attitude stability, the attitude-behavior association was strongest when attitudes were confident, when participants formed their attitude on the basis of behavior-relevant information, and when they received or were induced to think about one- rather than two-sided information about the attitude object.

Figure 1

Processes involved in the prediction of behavior from attitudes. Variables in boxes represent factors that influence attitude–behavior correspondence; variables in ovals denote the various indicants of those factors in our meta-analysis.

Figure 2

Path analyses for the influence of accessibility. Path coefficients were calculated on the basis of within-report Pearson rs converted to r.s. Units in these analyses were all reports involving measures of accessibility with three or more conditions, regardless of whether the conditions in those reports were collapsed for the rest of the analyses (e.g., Millar & Millar, 1996). A: k (number of conditions in the matrix) = 3; n (number of participants in the matrix) = 1,110. B: k = 3; n = 257. The models in Panels A and B are saturated. *p < .05. ***p < .001.

Figure 3

Path analysis for the influence of stability. Correlations between independent variables were as follows: motivation and repeated expression, r = .22, p < .001; motivation and one-sidedness of the information, r = .21, p < .001; one-sidedness of the information and repeated expression, r = .06, ns. Fit indexes for this model were as follows: χ2(6, N = 90) = 10.29, p < .2, Bentler–Bonett normed fit index = .93, comparative fit index = .97, incremental fit index = .97, root-mean-square residual = .05. The chi-square indicates a good fit when the associated significance value is higher than .05. The Bentler–Bonett normed fit index, the comparative fit index, and the Bollen’s incremental fit index reflect good fit when they exceed .90 (Bentler & Wu, 1995), and the root-mean-square residual represents adequate fit when it is equal to or less than .10. The minimum number of conditions shared by two variables in the matrix was 6; the minimum number of participants in the matrix was 90. †p < .1. *p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001.