Mkt 320 Attitudes

Front 1

Attitude

Back 1

A lasting general evaluation of people, objects, ads, or issues

Front 2

Attitude Object

Back 2

What we have an attitude towards. A sub o.

Front 3

ABC model of attitudes - A

Back 3

Affect - the way a consumer feels about Ao

Behavior- Person's intentions to do something with regard to an Ao

Front 4

ABC model - B

Back 4

Behavior - A person's intentions to do something with regard to an Ao. Ex: If my iPhone breaks, I'll buy a new one.

Front 5

ABC model - C

Back 5

Cognition - beliefs a consumer has about an Ao. Ex: Samsungs are better than iPhones

Front 6

Standard Learning Hierarchy

Back 6

Cognition - Affect - Behavior - Attitude (based on cognitive information processing)

Results in strong brand loyalty

Front 7

Low Involvement Hierarchy

Back 7

Cognition - Behavior - affect - attitude (based on behavioral learning)

Try and then decide if you like a product.

Consumer does not have strong brand preference

Front 8

Experiential Hierarchy

Back 8

Affect - Behavior - Cognition - attitude (based on hedonic consumption)

Immediately decide if we like something.

Front 9

Thin Slicing

Back 9

Assessing something by a tiny bit and then forming an attitude. Ex: Students given a one minute video of professors.

Gladwell, "Think"

Front 10

Coke Football Ad

Back 10

Liked by many but didn't raise sales, so was pulled.

Front 11

Consistency Principle

Back 11

We value harmony among thoughts, feelings, and behaviors.

We will change components to make them consistent.

Ex: You can't like both Michael Vick and dogs.

Front 12

Cognitive Dissonance

Back 12

when a consumer is confronted with inconsistencies among attitudes or behaviors, they will take action to resolve the dissonance.

Front 13

Cognitive Dissonance with illegal downloading of music

Back 13

"I know its illegal"

Consumer will either stop downloading, or rationalize it (Ex. I'm just one person so it won't make a difference)

Front 14

Social Judgment Theory

Back 14

We interpret new information about attitude objects in light of what we already know.

You always make an explicit or implicit comparison to something.

Front 15

Priming Example

Back 15

Professor showed half the class White Castle and half Wendys. Those who saw WC gave Coyote Jack's a higher rating than those who saw Wendys.

Front 16

Assimilation Effect

Back 16

When you group two or more attitude objects together. Basically, stereotyping.

Front 17

Balance Theory

Back 17

Considers relations among elements a consumer might perceive as belonging together. Ex. Michael Phelps and Corn FLakes

Front 18

Multi Attribute Attitude Models

Back 18

Consumer's attitudes toward an attitude object depends on the beliefs they have about attributes of the object. Ex. Colleges based on graduation rate.

Front 19

Fishbein Model

Back 19

Measures most important beliefs about Ao, Object attribute linkages, and evaluation of each important attribute.

Front 20

Fishbein equation

Back 20

Overall attitude score = consumers rating of each attribute for all brands x importance rating for that attribute