Why a single scale is not enough
Traditional attitude scales run from negative to positive, so someone who feels strongly in both directions may score the same as someone who feels nothing. Kaplan's 1972 work argued for measuring positive and negative reactions separately. Ambivalence and indifference are psychologically quite different states.
Objective and subjective ambivalence
Researchers separate calculated conflict from what people report feeling. Priester and Petty studied how the two relate, and found that subjective conflict rises as the weaker of two reactions becomes stronger. The two forms correlate only moderately.
- Objective: computed from separate positive and negative ratings
- Subjective: reported feelings of being torn or mixed
- Felt tension increases when a choice must actually be made
Consequences
Ambivalent attitudes tend to predict behavior less well and to be less stable. People who hold them may process relevant information more carefully, although the evidence is mixed, and they may respond strongly in the direction of whatever is salient at the moment. Van Harreveld and colleagues describe ambivalence as aversive mainly when a decision is pressing, with people often postponing choices to avoid the discomfort. Ambivalence is not always negative: it may reflect an accurate appreciation of complicated issues.
Further reading
- Kaplan, K. J. (1972). On the ambivalence-indifference problem in attitude theory and measurement. Psychological Bulletin, 77(5).
- Priester, J. R., & Petty, R. E. (1996). The gradual threshold model of ambivalence: Relating the positive and negative bases of attitudes to subjective ambivalence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71(3).
- van Harreveld, F., van der Pligt, J., & de Liver, Y. N. (2009). The agony of ambivalence and ways to resolve it. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 13(1).