Attitude Object Evaluations Current Influences of Attitude Object Evaluations

Objects can elicit a variety of emotional and cognitive responses from an individual (reviewed by Giner-Sorolla, 2004). The emotional and cognitive components of a response together define the summary attitude taken towards the object. The degree to which an object can influence behavior appears to be linked to the 'rate' with which an individual develops a summary attitude, such that faster appraisals are more influential because they elicited a stronger attitude. Strack and Deutsch (2004) attempt to merge numerous dualistic models in an effort to delineate the elements that influence an evaluative process. Based on their reflective-impulsive model, motivation is the primary driver of behavior, but the interval between the sighting of an attitude object and the resulting behavior varies depending on whether a person reacts primarily in a reflective (cognitive) or impulsive (emotional) manner.

Findings by Giner-Sorolla (2004) suggest that the quality of the summary attitude, whether emotionally- or cognitively-biased, predicts the temporal order of the emotional (impulsive) or cognitive (reflective) response. In other words, if a person feels strongly about the War in Afghanistan without having spent much time pondering the rational basis for their feelings, then the attitude towards the conflict will be primarily impulsive.

In Strack's and Deutsch's (2004, p. 222) reflective-impulsive model, the degree of deprivation can help determine whether a person will evaluate through an emotional or cognitive process. This model proposes that the greater the felt need for an object, the shorter the interval between sighting an attitude object and a behavioral response. If the need is great, Strack and Deutch (2004) suggest that the behavioral response will be preactivated and the evaluation impulsive. In other words, is a person wants something bad enough the resulting behavior is simply waiting for an attitude object to appear, and once it appears, the appraisal and behavioral response is automatic.

A number of factors have been found through empirical studies to influence the appraisal...

Since impulsive evaluations typically precede a reflective one, the nature and strength of the impulsive appraisal can influence a reflective appraisal (Strack and Deutsch, 2004, p. 229-230). In addition, impulsive and reflective appraisals can occur in parallel and interact with each other. When in agreement, a strong attitude is adopted, but when in conflict this can result in hesitation and temptation. Another potential influence on the appraisal process is the current goal or motivational orientation (Strack and Deutsch, 2004, p. 231). An example of being goal oriented would be craving a cheeseburger and vanilla shake with such strength that other foods are avoided until these objects are consumed. The physical status of an individual can influence the appraisal as well. When research subjects were asked to nod or shake their heads in response to words, nodding and shaking were found to enhance recognition of positive and negative words, respectively (Strack and Deutsch, 2004, p. 232-234). Posture, facial expressions, and arm muscle contractions or extensions are other physical factors that can influence the appraisal process. A person's mood, whether positive or negative, will influence the appraisal process. A good example is a person who is so angry that nothing seems to appease him or her; all the usual comfort objects, such as chocolate, a funny joke, or a good movie, are insufficient to overcome the negative affect.
Finally, the appraisal process can be influenced by what have been termed 'standards' (Rannazzisi, 2009, p. 11-19). While absolute standards do exist, for example a test score above 90 is typically an A grade, many evaluations rely on comparisons with less stable standards. One of the more widely recognized and accepted standards are social comparison. Social standards can be the attributes and experiences of a single individual, group, class, or society and the valuation of an attitude object will often be evaluated in reference to these social standards. The common cliche 'keeping up with the Jones" represents a neighbor's struggle to obtain attitude objects equal or superior in value to their neighbors. Evaluations may also be valued with respect to a…