A multitrait-multimethod analysis of four attitude assessment procedures

Jaccard, James; Weber, John; Lundmark, James

doi:10.1016/s0022-1031(75)80017-5

Cited by 46 publications

(23 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Fortunately, single-item attitude measures are quite widely used and are considered valid indicators of group evaluations. In previous work, such attitude measures demonstrated strong test-retest reliability (rs ϭ .91-.93 over 7 days, see Jaccard, Weber, & Lundmark, 1975). Haddock, Zanna, and Esses (1993) reported strong test-retest reliability over 2 weeks (r ϭ .77) and good validity through high correlations with a multiple-item measure (r ϭ .70).…”

Section: Limitations and Future Directionsmentioning

confidence: 82%

A joke is just a joke (except when it isn't): Cavalier humor beliefs facilitate the expression of group dominance motives.

Hodson¹,

Rush²,

MacInnis³

2010

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Past research reveals preferences for disparaging humor directed toward disliked others. The group-dominance model of humor appreciation introduces the hypothesis that beyond initial outgroup attitudes, social dominance motives predict favorable reactions toward jokes targeting low-status outgroups through a subtle hierarchy-enhancing legitimizing myth: cavalier humor beliefs (CHB). CHB characterizes a lighthearted, less serious, uncritical, and nonchalant approach toward humor that dismisses potential harm to others. As expected, CHB incorporates both positive (affiliative) and negative (aggressive) humor functions that together mask biases, correlating positively with prejudices and prejudice-correlates (including social dominance orientation [SDO]; Study 1). Across 3 studies in Canada, SDO and CHB predicted favorable reactions toward jokes disparaging Mexicans (low-status outgroup). Neither individual difference predicted neutral (nonintergroup) joke reactions, despite the jokes being equally amusing and more inoffensive overall. In Study 2, joke content targeting Mexicans, Americans (high-status outgroup), and Canadians (high-status ingroup) was systematically controlled. Although Canadians preferred jokes labeled as anti-American overall, an underlying subtle pattern emerged at the individual-difference level: Only those higher in SDO appreciated those jokes labeled as anti-Mexican (reflecting social dominance motives). In all studies, SDO predicted favorable reactions toward low-status outgroup jokes almost entirely through heightened CHB, a subtle yet potent legitimatizing myth that "justifies" expressions of group dominance motives. In Study 3, a pretest-posttest design revealed the implications of this justification process: CHB contributes to trivializing outgroup jokes as inoffensive (harmless), subsequently contributing to postjoke prejudice. The implications for humor in intergroup contexts are considered.

show abstract

Section: Limitations and Future Directionsmentioning

confidence: 82%

A joke is just a joke (except when it isn't): Cavalier humor beliefs facilitate the expression of group dominance motives.

Hodson¹,

Rush²,

MacInnis³

2010

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…First, women who agreed to participate were more likely to report having an abnormal Pap result in the past than women who refused; therefore, our sample may be biased toward women with high personal involvement. Second, our sample size was small, although it relied on published guidelines for theory development and testing 15,31,32 and previous qualitative studies on Pap test adherence among adolescents. 25 The small sample studied in this research may result in limited generalizability and nontrivial sampling error, particularly when exploring trends by race/ethnicity.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Psychological and Sociocultural Perspectives on Follow-up of Abnormal Papanicolaou Results

Breitkopf

Catero

Jaccard

et al. 2004

Obstetrics & Gynecology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

OBJECTIVE:To understand women's motivation to attend follow-up of an abnormal Papanicolaou (Pap) test by applying a general theoretical framework for voluntary behavior.METHODS: Semistructured, face-to-face interviews were conducted among 120 low-income, African-American, Caucasian, or Hispanic outpatients, aged 25-50 years, who presented for routine gynecologic care. Interview questions assessed social, cognitive, environmental, and emotional factors surrounding follow-up for an abnormal Pap test. Content analysis was performed. RESULTS:The majority of women (74%) described their attitude toward returning for a follow-up visit as favorable. Overall, knowledge regarding the significance of an abnormal result was poor, and misconceptions were common. Perceived barriers, consequences, and social influences associated with attending follow-up were qualitatively different across the 3 racial/ethnic groups. For example, AfricanAmerican and Hispanic women expressed embarrassment more frequently than Caucasian women and were less likely to anticipate obstacles to attending follow-up. Furthermore, African-American women were the least likely to be influenced by others' opinions and to perceive difficulty in adhering to follow-up recommendations. For nearly all women, adequate communication with their provider was a key component of anticipated adherence.

show abstract

“…Single-item measures may contain nuances of meaning and undertone that have unintended effects on respondents' responses (Eagly & Chaiken, 1993, p. 79). However, Jaccard, Weber, and Lundmark (1975) demonstrated that single-item measures can be as reliable as multiple-item measures, if the single item taps an overall evaluation of the attitude object. Our single-item measures were constructed in such a way that they involved the central aspect of the particular construct.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Public Reactions to People With HIV/AIDS in the Netherlands

Bos¹,

Kok²,

Dijker³

2001

AIDS Education and Prevention

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A national telephone survey was conducted to (a) assess present-day public reactions to people with HIV/AIDS in the Netherlands, (b) measure how knowledge about highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) is related to public reactions to people with HIV/AIDS, and (c) investigate determinants of willingness to have personal contact with people with HIV/AIDS. Dutch adults (N = 751) participated in a telephone interview conducted to measure cognitive, emotional, and behavioral reactions to people with HIV/AIDS. This study has shown that public reactions to people with HIV/AIDS seem to be moderately positive in the Netherlands. Knowledge about HAART is related to lower risk perceptions, a positive attitude toward homosexuals, less fear, and more willingness to have personal contact with people with HIV/AIDS. In particular, cognitive and emotional factors are meaningfully related to willingness to have personal contact with people with HIV/AIDS. Implications for Dutch AIDS educational campaigns aimed at stigma reduction are discussed.

show abstract

A multitrait-multimethod analysis of four attitude assessment procedures

Cited by 46 publications

References 5 publications

A joke is just a joke (except when it isn't): Cavalier humor beliefs facilitate the expression of group dominance motives.

A joke is just a joke (except when it isn't): Cavalier humor beliefs facilitate the expression of group dominance motives.

Psychological and Sociocultural Perspectives on Follow-up of Abnormal Papanicolaou Results

Public Reactions to People With HIV/AIDS in the Netherlands

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About