ABSTRACT
I n the most comprehensive single-volume review of attitudes, Eagly and Chai-ken (1993) defi ne attitude as “a psychological tendency that is expressed by evaluating a particular entity with some degree of favor or disfavor” (p. 1). Within Eagly and Chaiken’s (1993) defi nition rests decades of research that has conceptualized attitudes as generally positive or negative evaluations of objects. Implicit in this defi nition is the idea that there is no possibility of evaluating an attitude object as both positive and negative, yet as the anonymous quote at the beginning of this chapter implies, not all attitudes are so clear-cut. Moreover, we would argue that focusing solely on positive or negative attitudes oversimplifi es the concept of attitudes because even the most ardent cream cake-lover or partyhearty student will recognize negative aspects to their behavior just as the most fervent patriot might have some reservations about aspects of foreign policy (Citrin & Luks, 2005). Thus, cream cakes can be satisfying and depressing, drinking alcohol can be viewed as sociable and inappropriate, and one can love one’s country while hating how it treats other countries. As we shall see later in the chapter, it is equally plausible to be sexist and yet regard women as warm, sweet, and sensitive. The concept of attitudinal ambivalence neatly encapsulates those situations in which attitudes are not polarized and where positive and negative attitudes are expressed simultaneously toward an object.
