### Week 3 Discussion – Expressing Attitudes in Strong and Weak Situations
#### Part 1: Expressing Attitudes in a Strong Situation
Reflecting on my own experience, there was a time when I felt compelled to voice my attitude about a company’s unethical practices during a meeting. The context was a formal corporate meeting with senior management present. The company was discussing new policies that I believed were unfair to the lower-level employees and lacked transparency. My attitude towards ethical business practices and fairness was strong, but the situation was “strong” in the sense that there were significant social pressures to conform and not speak out. The corporate culture emphasized hierarchy and agreement with senior management decisions, and speaking against these practices could have been seen as insubordinate.
Several factors stopped me from stating my attitude. Firstly, the potential professional consequences were significant. Expressing my dissent could have resulted in being viewed negatively by superiors, potentially affecting my career advancement and job security. Additionally, there was a fear of social isolation or being labeled as a troublemaker by colleagues who might prefer to stay silent to avoid conflict. These consequences were substantial enough to dissuade me from expressing my true feelings about the policies being discussed.
#### Part 2: Expressing Attitudes in a Weak Situation
In contrast, I was able to express this same attitude more comfortably in a “weak” situation. This occurred during a casual gathering with colleagues outside of the formal work environment, such as during an informal lunch meeting. The context here was significantly different; the setting was relaxed, and the hierarchical boundaries were less pronounced. There was no immediate risk of professional repercussions, and the social dynamics were more supportive of open and honest discussion.
Expressing my attitude in this informal context was considerably easier. The lack of formal consequences and the presence of a supportive peer group provided a safe space to voice my concerns about the company’s practices. Additionally, the informal setting encouraged more candid conversations, and the absence of senior management reduced the pressure to conform to the company’s official stance. This weak situation allowed for a more genuine expression of attitudes, as the stakes were lower and the environment more conducive to open dialogue.
### References
Cialdini, R. B., & Goldstein, N. J. (2004). Social Influence: Compliance and Conformity. *Annual Review of Psychology, 55*(1), 591-621. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.55.090902.142015
Asch, S. E. (1951). Effects of Group Pressure upon the Modification and Distortion of Judgments. *Groups, Leadership, and Men*, 177-190.
Eagly, A. H., & Chaiken, S. (1993). *The Psychology of Attitudes*. Harcourt Brace Jovanovich College Publishers.
The discussion about strong and weak situations highlights how social and contextual factors can influence the expression of attitudes. Understanding these dynamics is crucial for navigating social interactions and professional environments effectively.
Week 3 Discussion – Expressing attitudes in strong and weak situations
Prompt:
Answer both parts of this exercise:
1. Reflect on an attitude that you wanted to express in a strong situation but could not because of social pressure (it felt inappropriate, uncomfortable, etc) and discuss the context in which this happened–what stopped you from stating your attitude? What consequences of stating your attitude stopped you?
2. Reflect on a weak situation in which you were able to more comfortably express this same attitude. What type of context was it? Was it easier to express your attitude in this different situation? Why?
Response Parameters:
You are expected to participate in all Discussion exercises assigned throughout the course in two stages.
· First, for each assignment, post a response that addresses the key Prompt question(s) presented by the stated deadline
· Second, in addition to posting your own response, you are required to post at least one peer response that thoughtfully and respectfully discusses/evaluates the idea of any classmate’s response posted on the Discussion Board
· In order to earn credit, all posts must be accompanied by at least one citation with accompanying reference outside of, or in addition to, the textbook. Wikipedia, ask.com, about.com and the like are not considered valid sources for any assignment in this course. Your post must adhere to APA citation rules. Grading will take into consideration grammar, spelling, organization, length, citations, knowledgeable content, display of logical reasoning, and adherence to APA citation and referencing
· Your meaningful feedback in these responses should reflect all four categories of the RISE model presented below: Reflect, Inquire, Suggest, and Elevate
· Minimum word requirement for initial posts is 250 words
"Place your order now for a similar assignment and have exceptional work written by our team of experts, guaranteeing you "A" results."
