Cognitive Choice Processes and the Attitude-Behavior Relation

  • Dietrich Albert
  • K. Michael Aschenbrenner
  • Franz Schmalhofer
Part of the Springer Series in Social Psychology book series (SSSOC)


Fishbein and Ajzen’s (1975) theory of reasoned action is currently the most successful and much discussed theory in attitude-behavior research. Although the theory is well established for predicting behavior in various contexts, its central assumption of a static attitude-behavior intention relation appears questionable when recent results of cognitively oriented decision research are considered. This assumption is dynamically reformulated in order to model the cognitive processes in binary choice. The resulting criterion-dependent choice models assume a sequential evaluative processing of the alternatives’ attributes until enough evidence in favor of one alternative is accumulated. Within this general framework, specific models distinguish between internally (memory) and externally (display) available information about the alternatives. The models and a series of experimental studies, which were specifically designed to investigate various aspects of the models, are comprehensively presented. Relations to other theories and consequences for attitude-behavior research are discussed.


Choice Task Binary Choice Choice Process Feature Pair Attractiveness Rating 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Ajzen, I. (1985). From intentions to actions: A theory of planned behavior. In J. Kuhl, & J. Beckmann, (Eds.), Action control: From cognition to behavior (pp. 11–39). Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  2. Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1977). Attitude-behavior relations: A theoretical analysis and review of empirical research. Psychological Bulletin, 84, 888–918.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1980). Understanding attitudes and predicting social behavior Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  4. Albert, D. (1968). Freies Reproduzieren als stochastische Entleerung eines Speichers. Zeitschrift für experimentelle und angewandte Psychologie, 15, 564–581.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Albert, D., Aschenbrenner, K.M., Engemann, A., Radtke, M., Sachs, S., & Schmalhofer, F. (submitted). Individuelle Binärwahlen: Ein Vergleich von simulierten Wahlheuristiken.Google Scholar
  6. Albert, D., Schmalhofer, F., & Aschenbrenner, KM. (1983, August). A Markovian model of individual choice behavior. Paper presented at the 16th Annual Mathematical Psychology Meeting, Boulder, CO.Google Scholar
  7. Albert, D., & Schulz, U. (1976). Das Reproduzieren und seine Beendigung: Ein Ausschöpfmodell. Psychologische Beiträge, 18, 1–11.Google Scholar
  8. Albert, D., & Schulz, U. (1981). Kritischer Test eines Modells zum Reproduzieren von Einheiten mehrerer Klassen durch Einbeziehung der Reproduktionszeiten oder: Über die Konkurrenz von Reproduktionstendenzen. In L. Tent (Hrg.), Erkennen-Wollen-Handeln (pp. 67–86). Göttingen/Toronto/Zürich: Hogrefe.Google Scholar
  9. Aschenbrenner, K.M. (1979). Kompexes Wahlverhalten als Problem der Informationsverarbeitung. In H. Ueckert & D. Rhenius (Hrg.), Komplexe menschliche Informationsverarbeitung (pp. 411–424). Bern/Stuttgart/Wien: Huber.Google Scholar
  10. Aschenbrenner, K.M. (1984). Moment-versus dimension-oriented theories of risky choice: A (fairly) general test involving single-peaked preferences. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning Memory, and Cognition, 10, 315–335.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Aschenbrenner, K.M. (1985). Das Eingipfligkeitsphänomen: Seine Erklärung und Bedeutung. In D. Albert (Hrg.), Bericht über den 34. Krongress der Deutschen Gesellschaftfür Psychologie in Wien 1984, Bd. 1, Grundlagenforschung (pp. 49–54). Göttingen: Hogrefe.Google Scholar
  12. Aschenbrenner, K.M., Albert, D., & Schmalhofer, F. (1984). Stochastic choice heuristics. Acta Psychologica, 56, 153–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Aschenbrenner, KM., Böckenholt, U., Albert, D., & Schmalhofer, F. (1986). The selection of dimensions when choosing between multi-attribute alternatives. In R.W. Scholz (Ed.), Current issues in West-German decision research (pp. 63–78). Frankfurt: Lang.Google Scholar
  14. Audley, R.J. (1963). A stochastic model for individual choice behavior: In R.D. Luce, R.R. Bush, & E. Galanter (Eds.), Readings in mathematical psychology (vol. 1, pp. 263–277). New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  15. Audley, R.J., & Pike, A.R. (1965). Some alternative stochastic models of choice. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 18, 207–225.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Birnbaum, M.H. (1973). The devil rides again: Correlation as an index of fit. Psychological Bulletin, 79, 239–242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Bower, G.H. (1959). Choice-point behavior. In R.R. Bush & W.K Estes (Eds.), Studies in mathematical learning theory (pp. 109–124). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  18. Busemeyer, J.R. (1982). Choice behavior in a sequential decision making task. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 29, 175–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Busemeyer, J.R. (1985). Decision making under uncertainty: A comparison of simple scalability, fixed-sample and sequential-sampling models. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning Memory, and Cognition, 11, 538–564.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Busemeyer, J.R., & Jones, L.E. (1983). Analysis of multiplicative combination rules. When the causal variables are measured with error. Psychological Bulletin, 93, 549–562.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Cronen, V.E., & Conville, R.E. (1975). Fishbein’s conception of belief strength: A theoretical, methodological and experimental critique. Speech Monographs, 42, 143–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Dawes, R.M. (1979). The robust beauty of improper linear models in decision making. American Psychologist, 34, 571–582.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Dawes, R.M., & Corrigan, B. (1974). Linear models in decision making. Psychological Bulletin, 81, 95–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Delia, J., Crockett, W., Press, A., & O’Keefe, D. (1975). The dependency of interpersonal evaluations on context-relevant beliefs about others. Speech Monographs, 42, 10–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Einhorn, H.J., Kleinmuntz, D.N., & Kleinmuntz, B. (1979). Linear regression and process-tracing models of judgment. Psychological Review, 5, 465–485.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Estes, W.K. (1959). A random walk model for choice behavior. In KJ. Arrow, S. Karlin, & P. Suppes (Eds.), Mathematical methods in the social sciences (pp. 265–276). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  27. Feller, W. (1957). An introduction to probability theory and its applications. (vol. 1, 2nd ed.). New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  28. Fishbein, M. (1963). An investigation of the relationship between beliefs about an object and the attitude toward that object. Human Relations, 16, 233–240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Fishbein, M. (1967). A behavior theory approach to the relations between beliefs about an object and the attitude toward the object. In M. Fishbein (Ed.), Readings in attitude theory and measurement (pp. 389–400). New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  30. Fishbein, M. (1973). The prediction of behavior from attitudinal variables. In C.D. Mortensen & KK Sereno (Eds.), Advances in communication research (pp. 3–31). New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
  31. Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1974). Attitudes toward objects as predictors of single and multiple behavioral criteria. Psychological Review, 81, 59–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Fishbein, M. & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention and behavior: An introduction to theory and research. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
  33. Gertzen, H., & Schmalhofer, F. (1986). Cognitive choice processes for sequentially or simultaneously presented alternatives. In R.W. Scholz (Ed.), Current issues in West-German decision research (pp. 79–94). Frankfurt: Lang.Google Scholar
  34. Krantz, D.H., Luce, R.D., Suppes, P., & Tversky, A. (1971). Foundations of measurement. Vol. 1: Additive and polynomial representations. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  35. Kühn, O., Schmalhofer, F., Albert, D., & Aschenbrenner, KM. (1986, March). Der Einfluss der Betrachtungsperspektive auf Textkodierung Gedächtnisabruf und Entscheidungsfindung. Vortrag auf der 28. Tagung experimentell arbeitender Psychologen (TEAP), Saarbrücken.Google Scholar
  36. Laier, R., Albert, D., Schmalhofer, F., & Aschenbrenner, K.M. (1986, March). Haben Absoluturteile (Ratings) über Länge und Attraktivität Intervallskalenniveau? Vortrag auf der 28. Tagung experimentell arbeitender Psychologen (TEAP), Saarbrücken.Google Scholar
  37. Lichtenstein, S., & Slovic, P. (1971). Reversals of preference between bids and choices in gambling decisions. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 89, 46–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Link, S.W. (1978). The relative judgment theory of the psychometric function. In J. Reguin (Ed.), Attention and performance vii (pp. 619–630). New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  39. Link, S.W., & Heath, R.A. (1975). A sequential theory of psychological discrimination. Psychometrika, 40, 77–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Luce, R.D. (1959). Individual choice behavior: A theoretical analysis. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  41. Luce, R.D. (1977). The choice axiom after twenty years. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 15, 215–233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Müller, G.E., & Pilzecker, A. (1900). Experimentelle Beiträge zur Lehre vom Gedächtnis. Zeitschrift für Psychologie, Ergänzungsband 1, Leipzig: Barth.Google Scholar
  43. Orth, B. (1979). Rating-Verfahren und Grössenschätz-Methode: Skalenniveau und funktionale Zusammenhänge zwischen Skalen. Diss. Math.-Naturwiss. Fak., Univ. Kiel.Google Scholar
  44. Orth, B. (1982). Zur Bestimmung der Skalenqualität bei ’direkten’ Skalierungsverfahren. Zeitschrift für experimentelle und angewandte Psychologie, 24, 160–178.Google Scholar
  45. Payne, J.W. (1982). Contingent decision behavior. Psychological Bulletin, 9, 382–402.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Petrusic, W.M., & Jamieson, D.G. (1978). Relation between probability of preferential choice and time to choose changes with practice. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 4, 471–482.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Raijmakers, J.G.W., & Shiffrin, R.M. (1981). Search of associative memory. Psychological Review, 88, 93–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Ratcliff, R. (1978). A theory of memory retrieval. Psychological Review, 85, 59–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Russo, J., & Dosher, B.A. (1983). Strategies for multiattribute binary choice. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning Memory, and Cognition, 9, 676–696.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Schmalhofer, F. (1987). Expert systems as cognitive tools for human decision making. In J.L. Mumpower, L.E. Phillips, O. Renn, & V.R.R. Uppuluri (Eds.), Expert judgment and expert systems (pp. 269–288). Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer.Google Scholar
  51. Schmalhofer, F., Albert, D., Aschenbrenner, K.M., & Gertzen, H. (1986). Process traces of binary choices: Evidence for selective and adaptive decision heuristics. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 38A, 59–76.Google Scholar
  52. Schmalhofer, F., Aschenbrenner, KM., Albert, D., & Gertzen, H. (submitted). Criterion-dependent choices between binary alternatives presented by name or multidimensional description.Google Scholar
  53. Schmalhofer, F., & Gertzen, H. (1986). Judgment as a component decision process for choosing between sequentially available alternatives. In B. Brehmer, H. Jungermann, P. Lourens, & G. Sevón (Eds.), New directions in research on decision making (pp. 139–150). North-Holland: Elsevier.Google Scholar
  54. Schmalhofer, F. & Saffrich, W. (1984, August). Effort-quality trade-off characteristics of selective information processing in binary choices. Unpublished manuscript of a paper presented at the European Mathematical Psychology Meeting, Utrecht/Holland.Google Scholar
  55. Schmalhofer, F., & Schäfer, I. (1986). Lautes Denken bei der Wahl zwischen benannt und beschrieben dargebotenen Alternativen. Sprache und Kognition, 2, 73–81.Google Scholar
  56. Schoemaker, P.J.H. (1979). The role of statistical knowledge in gambling decisions: Moment vs. risk dimension approaches. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 24 (1), 1–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Schoemaker, P.J.H., & Waid, C.C. (1982). An experimental comparison of different approaches to determining weights in additive utility models. Management Science, 28, 101–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Shiffrin, P.M. (1970). Memory search. In D.A. Norman (Ed.), Models of memory (pp. 375–447). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  59. Six, B. (1980). Das Konzept der Einstellung und seine Relevanz für die Vorhersage des Verhaltens. In F. Petermann (Hrg.), Einstellungsmessung—Einstellungsforschung (pp. 55–84). Göttingen: Hogrefe.Google Scholar
  60. Stroebe, W. (1980). Grundlagen der Sozialpsychologie I. Stuttgart: Klett-Cotta.Google Scholar
  61. Strube, G. (1984). Assoziation: der Prozess des Erinnerns und die Struktur des Gedächtnisses. Lehr-und Forschungstexte Psychologie, Bd. 6. Berlin/New York/Heidelberg: Springer.Google Scholar
  62. Svenson, O. (1979). Process descriptions of decision making. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 23, 86–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Thorngate, W. (1980). Efficient decision heuristics. Behavioral Science, 25, 219–225.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Thurstone, L.L. (1927). A law of comparative judgment. Psychological Review, 34, 273 286.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Tversky, A. (1969). Intransitivity of preferences. Psychological Review, 76, 31–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Upmeyer, A. (1982). Attitudes and social behavior. In J.P. Codol, & J.-P. Leyens, (Eds.), Cognitive analysis of social behavior (pp. 51–86). The Hague: Nijhoff.Google Scholar
  67. van Putten, W.L.J. (1982). Maximum likelihood estimates for Luce’s choice model. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 25, 163–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Wald, A. (1950). Sequential analysis. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  69. Wallsten, T.S. (1980). Processes and models to describe choice and inference behavior. In T.S. Wallsten (Ed.), Cognitive processes in choice and decision behavior (pp. 215–237). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  70. Wallsten, T.S., & Barton, C. (1982). Processing probabilistic multidimensional information for decisions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning Memory, and Cognition, 8, 361–384.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Wicker, A.W. (1969). Attitudes versus actions: The relationship of verbal and overt behavioral responses to attitude objects. Journal of Social Issues, 25, 41–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag New York Inc. 1989

Authors and Affiliations

  • Dietrich Albert
  • K. Michael Aschenbrenner
  • Franz Schmalhofer

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations