Katarzyna Byrka

Reviving Campbell's Paradigm for Attitude Research

Because people often say one thing and do another, social psychologists have abandoned the idea of a simple or axiomatic connection between attitude and behavior. Nearly 50 years ago, however, Donald Campbell proposed that the root of the seeming inconsistency between attitude and behavior lies in disregard of behavioral costs. According to Campbell, attitude— behavior gaps are empirical chimeras. Verbal claims and other overt behaviors regarding an attitude object all arise from one “behavioral disposition.” In this article, the authors present the constituents of and evidence for a paradigm for attitude research that describes individual behavior as a function of a person’s attitude level and the costs of the specific behavior involved. In the authors’ version of Campbell’s paradigm, they propose a formal and thus axiomatic rather than causal relationship between an attitude and its corresponding performances. The authors draw implications of their proposal for mainstream attitude theory, empirical research, and applications concerning attitudes.

Environmental attitude as a mediator of the relationship between psychological restoration in nature and self-reported ecological behavior

Environmental attitude and ecological behavior were investigated in relation to the use of nature for psychological restoration. Specifically, with survey data from 468 German university students, the role of environmental attitude was investigated as a mediator of the restoration-behavior relationship. Assuming that positive experiences in nature can have a broad influence on environmental attitudes, the New Ecological Paradigm (NEP) scale, an attitudinal measure with broad scope, was adopted. Hierarchical regression analyses indicated partial mediation by environmental concern. The study helps to consolidate the restoration theme in the growing literature on positive motivations for ecological behavior.

The Campbell Paradigm as a Conceptual Alternative to the Expectation of Hypocrisy in Contemporary Attitude Research

Hypocrisy—professing a general attitude without implementing corresponding attitude-relevant behavior—is, according to Ajzen and Fishbein (2005), commonly found in attitude research that aims to explain individual behavior. We conducted two studies that adopted the Campbell paradigm, an alternative to the traditional understanding of attitudes. In a laboratory experiment, we found that specific attitude-relevant cooperation in a social dilemma was a function of people’s pre-existing general environmental attitude. In a quasi-experiment, we corroborated the reverse as well; engagement in attitude-relevant dietary practices was indicative of environmental attitude. When using Campbellian attitude measures, there is no room for hypocrisy: People put their general attitudes into specific attitude-relevant practices, and differences in people’s general attitudes can be derived from their attitude-relevant behavior.

Health performance of individuals within the Campbell paradigm

In this paper, we developed a comprehensive health performance measure that formally links individual health attitudes with the likelihood of engaging in a wide variety of health-related behaviours from various domains such as sustenance, hygiene, and physical exercise. Within what Kaiser, Byrka, and Hartig (2010) call the Campbell paradigm, we equated general health attitude with what a person does to retain or promote his or her health. Thus, health behaviours, on one hand, were expected to form a homogeneous, transitively ordered class of behaviours. On the other hand, the very behavioural class was in turn thought to be the basis from which an individuals health attitude could be directly assessed. A sample of 391 adults provided us with survey data containing different sets of health behaviours as well as variables and personality measures that had been corroborated as health-behaviour relevant in previous research. We found that self-reports of 50 behaviours and expressions of appreciation for 20 of these behaviours from various domains formed a transitively ordered class of activities. In contrast to the conventional view in health psychology, in which attitudes are regarded as a psychological cause behind individual behaviour, and in contrast to conventional findings in health psychology, where behaviours appear to fall into numerous sets of more or less distinct domains of health-enhancing activities (e.g., exercising or avoiding risks), our findings speak of the psychological and formal unity of health behaviour. Inevitably, attitude measures grounded in the Campbell paradigm gauge individual attitudes, and just as much, they measure the health performance of individuals.

Understanding the Acceptance of Nature-Preservation-Related Restrictions as the Result of the Compensatory Effects of Environmental Attitude and Behavioral Costs

Personal costs that accompany nature-preservation-related restrictions hurt their acceptance, irrespective of whether individuals care about environmental protection or not (i.e., irrespective of people’s environmental attitude). Analogically, people’s environmental attitude unconditionally determines their acceptance of nature-preservation-related restrictions, irrespective of the costs. This view stands in contrast to the typical NIMBY (not-in-my-back-yard) research in which people’s environmental attitude is expected to moderate the costs that arise from proximate exposure to nature-preservation efforts. In our quasi-experiment involving community samples of 598 Polish residents living at different distances from a nature preserve, we corroborated that the proximity and, thus, the palpable costs that come with nature-preservation efforts diminished people’s acceptance of nature-preservation-related restrictions. Over and above this NIMBY effect, environmental attitude determined people’s acceptance even beyond income and education. Predictably, environmental attitude is even able to compensate for the costs involved when people live in close proximity to a nature preserve.

Restorative Qualities of and Preference for Natural and Urban Soundscapes

Psychological restoration in urban agglomerations has become a growing challenge. Although scientific proof of the significance of nature is irrefutable, an increase in built-up areas has led to a decrease in urban greenery. Thus, a growing need for restorativeness in urban surroundings has emerged. To investigate whether positively evaluated sonic environments, represented by natural and urban sounds, have comparable restorative qualities we conducted two studies. The aim of the first (Study 1) was to explore the restorative qualities of positively assessed natural and urban sounds. Participants (N = 88) were asked to listen and to rate 22 recordings (each 1 min long) either from natural or urban environments. In the second (Study 2) we investigated whether positively evaluated sonic environments (natural and urban), demand for restoration (feeling relaxed or fatigued) and company (being alone or with a friend) affect the restorative qualities of natural and urban soundscapes. After reading assigned scenarios (feeling relaxed or fatigued; being alone or with a friend), participants (N = 120) were asked to imagine a walk in presented sonic environments and to complete forms (one for each sonic environment) concerning the restorative qualities of given soundscapes (natural and urban). Top five recordings of natural and urban sonic environments were selected from Study 1 and combined into a 154-s soundtrack, to provide a background for the imagined walks in both settings. Our findings confirmed that natural sounds are perceived more favorably than urban recordings. Even when only the most positively assessed soundscapes were compared, nature was still perceived as being more restorative than urban areas. Company of a friend was found to be more beneficial in the urban surroundings, particularly when there was no need for restoration.

The question-behaviour effect in intergroup attitudes research: When do attitudes towards a minority predict a relevant behaviour?: THE QUESTION-BEHAVIOR EFFECT

We hypothesised that the question-behaviour effect, referred to as the influence of questioning about a given behaviour on its subsequent performance, is a relevant issue when exploring the external validity of intergroup attitudes. In a pair of studies, we have corroborated that merely expressing attitudes towards the Jewish minority affects peoples relevant behaviour towards this group. In an Internet study, participants who first completed verbal attitude measures were more likely to donate to a Jewish organisation compared to those who completed the measures after making the decision to donate. Moreover, responses to attitude measures of various types and donating to the Jewish organisation were correlated when attitudes had been expressed in the first step. When attitudes were measured after the decision to donate, only the responses to the traditional anti-Semitic scale were correlated with this behaviour. In the field study, in which the time interval between attitude and behaviour measures was introduced, no question-behaviour effect was observed. We explain the results with reference to cognitive dissonance and attitude accessibility mechanisms and discuss them in a broader context of attitude-behaviour research.