NAME-ANJALI

CHAURAS
CLASS-XII E
IA
ISC PSYCHOLOGY PRACTICAL 2 (2023-24)
TOPIC-ATTITUDE
UID- 7587361

1)
Definitio
n of
Attitude
2) ABC model of
attitude
3) How are
attitudes
formed?
4) Determinants
of
attitudes
5) How are
attitudes
changed
through
persuasion
and
 cognitiv
e
dissonan
ce
6) Prejudice
(definition
and
origin)
7) Discrimination
8) Attitudes
towards
marriage-
questionnaire
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
Psychologists have extensively studied the formation,
structure, and functions of attitudes. One influential theory
is the cognitive consistency theories, such as Leon
Fastener’s cognitive dissonance theory, which
posits that individuals strive for consistency between their
attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors. Research also suggests
that attitudes can be shaped through socialization
processes, including persuasion, social norms, and direct
experience. Understanding attitudes is crucial in various
domains, including social psychology, consumer behavior,
marketing, politics, and intergroup relations. It can
provide insights into how individuals form opinions, make
choices, and interact with others. Furthermore, studying
attitude change and persuasion techniques can be
valuable in developing effective communication strategies
and interventions. In conclusion, acknowledging the topic
of attitude in psychology is fundamental for
comprehending its impact on human behavior and
decision-making.
Attitudes influence perceptions, interpretations,
memories, preferences, motivations, and actions.
Exploring attitudes helps us understand how individuals
form opinions, make choices, and interact with others,
making it a vital area of study in psychology.
• ATTITUDES- G.W. Allport Who introduced this term,
define attitude as a preparation or readiness for
response. Attitudes can be defined as lasting evaluations
of virtually any and every aspect of the social world
issues, ideas, persons my social groups, objects.
Attitudes are also defined as a learned predisposition to
respond to a person or an object in either a favorable or
unfavorable way.

• THE
ABCMODEL-Albert Ellis
A- Affective B- Behavior C- Cognitive
Affective or Behavioral or Cognitive or
belief
feeling action component
refers
component component to the sets of
refers to the refers to the beliefs and
emotions actual opinions
behavior through
associated which occurs which the
with in attitude
the person or relation to a is expressed.
an
object. These person or an
emotions object. If a
include
pleasant or person holds
a
unpleasant positive
attitude
feelings, liking towards
or another
disliking for person, he
the will
object, good show a
or tendency
bad mood, to help
support
attraction or that person.
If
aversion. his attitude is
Feeling
component negative, the
serves as a tendency
would
motivating be to
factor discourage
and intensity or ignore that
of
positive or person.
negative
feeling
would
determine
the
motivational
force behind
the
resulting
behavior.
Eg- The Eg- A Eg- The
effective favorable cognitive
component of attitude component of
towards the
your attitude the particular attitude
towards
towards the party would the political
party
political party prompt you to may refer to
the
would be campaign for belief whether
whether or
you feel good that party in not the party
or an has
bad when this election or to honest,
unselfish
party wins or actually join and capable
the
loses an party as a persons as
election. member. leaders. The
cognitive
component
also
refers to how
this
party should
be
assessed by
the
masses and
stop
specifically a
positive
attitude
towards the
political party
implies A
 belief
that after
coming
to the power
this
party would
provide a
better
government
to
the country
than
any other
political
party.

• HOW ARE
ATTITUDES FORMED?-
1)Learning attitudes by associations (classical conditioning)-
You might have seen that students often develop a liking
for a particular
subject because of the teachers is because the sea many
positive qualities in that teacher, these positive qualities
get situated to the subject that they teach and ultimately
gets expressed in the form of liking for the subject as
well.

2)Learning attitudes by being rewarded or punished

(operant conditioning)
-
If an individual is braised for having a particular attitude,
chances are high that he will develop that attitude
further. For example if a teenager does yoga on regular
basis and gets the honor of being “Miss good health” in
her school she may develop a positive attitude toward
yoga and health in general.

modelling (observational learning)-

3)Learning attitudes through
We learned them by observing others being rewarded or
punished. For expressing thoughts or showing behavior in a
particular kind towards the attitude object for example
children may form a respectful attitude towards elders by
observing their parents commercial respect for elders and
are appreciated for it.

norms-
4)Learning attitudes through group or cultural
We learn attitudes through the norms offer group or
culture. Norms are universal rules about behavior that
everyone is supposed to show under specific
circumstances. These norms may become a part of our
social cognition, in the form of attitudes. Learning attitudes
through group or cultural norms may actually be an
example of learning through association, reward or
punishment as well as modelling.

5)Learning through exposure to information-

Many attitudes are learned in a social context. Today, with
the huge amount of information that is being provided
through various medias, both
positive and negative attitudes are being framed.

DETERMINANTS
OFATTITUDE-
1)Family and school
environment-
Parents and other family members play a significant role
in shaping attitude formation. Later the school
environment becomes an important background for
attitude formation learning usually takes place by
association through rewards and punishments and
modelling.

2)Reference groups-
Reference groups indicate to an individual the norms
regarding acceptable behavior in ways of thinking they
reflect learning of attitudes through group or cultural
norms. Their influence is noticeable especially during the
beginning of adolescence at which time it is important for
the individual to feel that he or she belongs to a group.
Therefore, the role of reference groups in attitude
formation may also be a gates of learning through reward
and punishment.

3)Personal experiences-
Many attitudes are formed through various personal
experiences which bring about a drastic change in our
attitude towards people and our over life.

influences-
4)Media related
Technological advances in recent times have made audio
visual media and the Internet very powerful source of
information that lead to attitude formation and change.
The media can both in good and bad way influence our
attitude.
• HOW ATTITUDES
ARE CHANGED?
1) Persuasion-The process through which one or more
persons attempt to alter the attitudes of one or more
others (Leon Festinger & Carl Hovland).
In the early 21st century, the business of changing
attitudes or at least trying to change them seems to grow
bigger and more intense through television commercials,
magazine arts, billboards, warning labels on products,
etc. the goal remains the same to change people's
attitude and so ultimately their behavior. Psychologists
have the following observation about these issues-
★Experts are more persuasive than non experts (Hovland
and Weiss, 1951). The arguments carry more weight when
delivered by people who seem to know what they are
talking about than, when they are made by people lacking
expertise.
★Messages that do not appear to be designed to change
their attitudes are often more successful in respect than
once that seem intended to reach this goal (Walter &
Festinger, 1962). In other words, we generally don’t trust
and generally refuse to be influenced by persons who
deliberately set out to persuade us. This is one reason
why the soft sell is so popular in advertising and in
politics.
★attractive sources are more effective in changing attitudes
than unattractive ones (Kiesler and Kiesler, 1969). This is
one reason why the models featured in many ads are highly
attractive and why advertisers engage in a perpetual
search for appealing new faces.
★People who speak rapidly are more often persuasive than
persons who speak more slowly (Miller et al., 1976). So,
contrary to popular belief, we do not always distrust fast
talking politicians and salespersons.
★persuasion can be enhanced by messages that arouse
strong emotions especially fear in the audience
particularly when the message provides specific
recommendations about how a change in attitudes or
behavior will prevent the negative consequences
described in the fear provoking message (Leventhal,
Singer & Jones, 1965).
★Cognitive approach to persuasion and ELM- elaboration
likelihood model.
Message source- credibility of sources, attractiveness.
Content of the message- suggestion, Appeals to fear,
one sided vs two sided messages. Characteristic of
target- influenceability, selective attention and
interpretation, immunization.

2) Cognitive dissonance-The state experienced by

individuals when they discover inconsistency between
two attitudes they hold between their attitudes and
their behavior (Leon Festinger).
Dissonance, it appears, is quite unpleasant, So when we
experience it we attempt to reduce it we can accomplish
this in several different ways that are-
★First, we can change our attitudes or behavior so that
these are more consistent with each other for example we
can convince ourselves that the color of a friend sweater is
not really so bad.
★second, we can acquire new information that supports
our attitude or behavior. For instance, we can seek out
information indicating that our boss’s plan does make
some sense.
Dissonance and the less leads to more effect-
It is a finding that offering individual small rewards for
engaging in counter attitudinal behavior often produces
more dissonance and so more attitude changes than
offering larger rewards.
For example say there happens to be a corrupt invigilator
he offers a student to share questions worth 5 points for
an upcoming test if she babysits his toddler in this case
the attitude of the student is that she should not cheat
and she has great dissonance whether to do it or not
comma eventually refuses behavior but what if the
invigilator offered questions worth complete 100 points?
Theory says that it is likely that the student will have
lesser dissonance and might accept she still believes that
it is immoral and illegal to cheat but would now have
stronger justification for her actions.
Less Dissonance→
accepts More
Dissonance→ refuses
Putting dissonance work: Hypocrisy and safe sex
• People who don’t wear safety belts are much
more likely to die in accidents than those who do.
• people who smoke heavily are much more likely to
develop lung cancer and heart disease than those who
don’t.
• People who engage in unprotected sex are much
more likely than those who engage in safe sex to
contract Dangerous diseases, including AIDS.

• Prejudice- Negative attitudes toward the members

of some social group based on their membership in this
group.

ORIGINOFPREJUDICE-
The concept of social learning realistic competition
stereotyping and social categorization are factors causing
prejudice-
1) Social Learning- Negative attitudes are learned in
the same way as the positive attitudes through the
process of social learning. Prejudice emerges out of
countless experiences in which children hear or observe
their parents, friends, teachers and other expressing
prejudiced views.
Because children want to be like these persons and are
often rewarded for expressing the right views they quickly
adopt such attitudes themselves.
While persons with whom children interact play a key role
in this process, the mass media, two are important. If
television, films, and other media present members of
various social groups in an unflattering light, this may
contribute to the development of prejudice on the part of
children.

2) Realistic Competition- Many of the things we value

most are good job, a nice home, high status aren’t short
supply. This fact serves as the basis for realistic conflict
theory. According to this view prejudice stems from
competition between social groups overvalued
commodities or opportunities as such competition
persists, the members of each group involved come to
view the other group in an increasingly negative ways.
They label members of other groups as enemies, view of
their own groups
as superior and draw the boundaries between themselves
and their opponents even more firmly. As a result what
starts out as economic competition gradually turns into full
scale prejudice.

3) Stereotypes-Stereotypes are cognitive frameworks

consisting of knowledge and beliefs about specific social
groups frameworks suggesting by and large all members
of these groups possesses certain traits at least were
degree like other cognitive frameworks stereotype exert
strong effects on the ways in which the process social
information. Information relevant to a particular
stereotype is processed more quickly than information
unrelated to it. Similarly stereotypes lead us to pay
attention to specific types of information that is usually
information consistent with the stereotypes. And when
information inconsistent with the stereotypes does
manage to enter consciousness, it may be actively refuted
or simply denied once an individual has acquired A
stereotype about some social group, she or he tends to
notice in information that fits into this cognitive
framework and to remember facts that are consistent with
it more readily than facts inconsistent with it. As a result
the stereotype strengthens with time and may ultimately
become invulnerable new information or experiences
simply can’t change it.

4) Social Categorization-A second perspective on the

origins of prejudice begins with a basic fact we all tend to
divide the social board into two distinct categories us and
them. We view other persons as belonging either to our
own social group, usually turned the in group or to
another group and out group. We make such distinctions
on the basis of many dimensions including race, religion,
gender, age, ethnic background, occupation and even the
town or neighborhood where people live. If this process of
social categorization the dividing of the word into distinct
social categories stopped there, it would have little
connection to prejudice. Unfortunately it does not hold
sharply contrasting feelings and beliefs are usually
attached to members of ones in Group and to member of
various out groups.
Persons in the US category are viewed in favorable terms
where as those in the them category are perceived
negatively. Out group members are assumed to possess
more undesirable treats, are seen as being moral alike
homogeneous than members of the in Group, and are
often disliked. This is often a very basic distinction around
the world, the word used by many different cultures to
refer to themselves translates roughly as human beings,
whereas the word used for other groups translate as
nonhuman in the US southwest for instance the Navaho
referred to the long vanished group that left impressive
cliff dwellings and other ruins as the Anasazi a word
meaning people who are not us. The in Group out group
distinction also affects attribution Explanation for others
behaviors we tend to attribute desirable behaviors by
members of our in Group to stable internal causes such as
their admirable traits but to attribute desirable behaviors
by members of our groups to temporary factors or to
external ones such as luck. This tendency to make more
favorable attributions about members of one’s own group
than about members of other groups is sometimes
referred to as the ultimate attribution error for it carries
the self-serving bias I described earlier into the area of
intergroup variation with potentially devastating effects.

• DISCRIMINATION: Prejudice in action-

Attitudes, are not always reflected in overt actions, and
prejudice is no exception to this. In many cases, people
with negative attitudes towards various groups cannot
express their views directly. Laws social pressure, fear of
retaliation all serve to deter them from putting their
prejudiced views into practice. For these reasons, balatan
forms of discrimination have decreased in recent years in
the United States and many other countries.
Thus actions such as restricting members of various
schools to certain seats on buses or in movie theaters,
barring them from public school or neighborhoods, which
were all common in the past have now largely vanished in
many countries. This is not to suggest that extreme
expression of prejudice have totally vanished however On
the contrary dramatic instances of hate crimes which are
crimes based on racial, ethnic and other types of
prejudice, continue to occur. For instance Manvinder Singh
Gohil a prince of a conservative Guajarati royal family who
came out as gay in 2005 and Zoltan Parag, Mr. Gay India
2008, were respectively disinherited and ostracized in
India. Antique websites, like websites for other hate
groups present violent crimes against gays as desirable
despite these extreme incidents, prejudice in general
often finds expression in much more subtle
forms of behavior. We turn now to the subtle or disguised
forms of discrimination, exclude from a society a group.

1)Modern racism: More subtle but just as deadly-

At one time, many people felt no qualms about the
expressing openly racist beliefs. Now few north Americans
openly state such anti African American sentiment. Does
this means that racism has disappeared or is on the wane?
Although this is certainly plausible, many social
psychologists believe that old fashioned racism
encompassing blatant feeling of superiority has been
replaced by more subtle forms which they term modern
racism. What is such racism like? It can involve concealing
prejudice from others in public settings but expressing
bigoted Attitudes when it is safe to do so. It might also
involve attributing various bigoted views to sources other
Dan prejudice, whenever another explanation for
potentially biased behavior is feasible it could also involve
attempting to appear color blind and refusing to
acknowledge races as a means of suggesting one isn’t a
true racist.

implicit racial
2)Measuring attitudes:
Finding a bona fide pipeline-
The most straightforward approach to measuring prejudice
is to simply ask people to express their views towards
various racial, ethnic, or gender groups. But many people
are not willing to admit to holding prejudice views so
alternative ways of assessing their actual views have been
developed.
Social psychologists have recognized that many attitudes
people hold are implicit that is they exist and can impress
several forms of behavior but the people holding them
may not be aware of doing so. In fact in some cases they
might vigorously deny that they have such views and
instead proclaim their color blindness. How then can such
subtle forms of prejudice be measured? Several different
methods have been developed but most are based on
priming in which exposure to certain stimuli or events the
prime information held in memory, making it easier to
bring to mind or more available to influence our current
reactions. Implicit memory is exposure to
a stimulus influences response to a later stimulus.

• DISCRIMINATION ONRELIGION, AND IN INDIA:

BASED CASTE, GENDER
The consequences –
The consequences of discrimination based on religion,
caste, and gender in India include:

1.Lower self-esteem: Individuals who face discrimination

based on their religion, caste, or gender may develop lower
self-esteem as they internalize the negative stereotypes
associated with their identity. Constant exposure to
discrimination can erode their sense of self-worth and
lead to feelings of inferiority.

2.Mental health issues: Discrimination can have a

detrimental impact on the mental health of individuals.
Experiencing prejudice and discrimination can lead to
increased levels of stress, anxiety, depression, and
psychological distress. This can further contribute to a
range of mental health disorders.

3.Identity conflicts: Discrimination can create identity

conflicts for individuals who are forced to reconcile their
personal identity with the negative stereotypes
associated with their religion, caste, or gender. They
may experience a dissonance between their self-
perception and the way they are perceived by others,
leading to a feeling of being caught in between cultural
or religious expectations and personal aspirations.

4.Inter-group tensions: Discrimination based on religion,

caste, and gender can lead to heightened inter-group
tensions and conflicts in society.
Prejudice and discrimination can create divisions, mistrust,
and hostility between different religious, caste, and gender
groups, hindering social cohesion and harmony.
5.Limited opportunities and social exclusion:
Discrimination can lead to limited opportunities for
individuals belonging to certain religious, caste, or gender
groups. They may face barriers in education,
employment, and social participation, contributing to
their social exclusion and marginalization.

6.Internalized prejudice: Individuals who face

discrimination may also internalize the prejudice
against their own group. This can result in the
internalization of negative stereotypes and adopting a
self-deprecating attitude, further perpetuating the
cycle of discrimination.

• WHY
Techniques for countering
PREJUDICE IS NOT INEVITABLE?- its
effects-
Prejudice, in some form, appears to be an all too common
aspect of life in most if not all, societies. Does this mean
that it is inevitable? as we explained throughout this
chapter, prejudice certainly has some regular properties
that is it will escalate under competition or when once
group identity has been threatened by a negative
comparison with another group. Yet under the right
conditions prejudice towards particular group can be
reduced.

• On learning not to hate-

According to the social learning view, children acquire
negative attitudes towards various social groups because
they hear such views expressed by significant others and
because they are directly rewarded with love, praise and
approval for adopting these views. In addition, people’s
own recent experience with people belonging to other
groups also shape attitudes.
Evidence from this strong impact of both these types of
childhood experiences on several aspects of racial
prejudice has been reported. That is the most Caucasian
participant parents are prejudiced and the less positive
participants own interactions with minority group persons
were greater restraint participants felt when interaction
with African Americans.
With the extent that it the trains reflect feeling of social
awkwardness and anticipation of potential conflict, these
findings support the role of parents in training children to
be prejudiced. The question of whether all children are
equally influenced by their parents explicit racial attitudes
has been examined perhaps the degree to which parents
racial attitudes and the children's are related depends on
the extent to which those children identify with their
parents. Children who care about making their parents
proud of them should show the greatest parental
influence. In a sample of 4th and 5th graders, it was found
that parental and children’s racial attitudes were positively
related only among children with relatively high identification
with their parents. How might parents be encouraged to
teach racial tolerance to their children? Research as
revealed that highly prejudiced people experience
everyday activities and life itself as lower in enjoyment
than do people low in prejudice because it is clear that
people holding intense racial and ethnic Suffer harmful
effects from their intolerant views these findings might
well be used to encourage change in parents because
most parents want to do everything they can to further
their children’s well-being, calling these costs to their
attention may be effective in discouraging them from
transmitting, at least explicitly, prejudice views to their
children.

• The potential benefits of contact: Contact hypothesis-

Increased contact between people from different groups
can lead to a growing recognition of similarities between
them, which can change the categorizations that people
employ. As we saw previously those who are categorized
as I responded to more positively than those categorized
as them increase contact or merely having knowledge that
other members of our group have such contact in out
group members can signal that the norms of the groups
are not so anti outgroup as individuals might initially have
believed. The existence of cross group friendships
suggests that member of the outer group do not
necessarily dislike members of our in Group and this
knowledge can reduce intergroup anxiety. Other
researchers has likewise suggested that among groups
throughout Europe, positive contact that is seen as
important, when it reflects increased cooperation between
the groups, can change norms so that group equality is
favored and thereby reduce prejudice. Moreover the
beneficial effects of such cross group friendships can
readily spread to the other people who have not
themselves experienced such contacts, simply knowing
about them can be enough.

Recategorization: Changing the boundaries-

Situations in which we shift the boundary between us and
them, are quite common in everyday life and there is an
interesting question cancer shifts or recategorization as
it’s termed by social psychologists be used to reduce
prejudice? The common in-group identity model suggests
that it can. To the extent that individuals who belong to
different social groups come to view themselves as
member of a single social entity, their attitudes towards
each other become more positive so although us and them
categorical distinctions can produce prejudice when them
becomes as, prejudice should be eliminated how can we
induce people who belong to different groups, to perceive
themselves as members of a single group? As Sherif and
others (1961), observed at the Robber’s Cave boys camp,
When individuals belonging to initially distinct groups
work together towards
shared or superordinate goals, outgroup toward them
seemed to fade away. Such effects, Have been
demonstrated In several studies, both in the laboratory and
in the field when recategorization can be induced
successfully it has proven to be a useful technique for
reducing prejudice toward those who were previously
categorized as our group members. The power of shifting
to a more inclusive category for reductions in negative
feelings towards an outgroup has been shown even more
among groups with a long history including one groups
brutality towards another.

The benefits of guilt for prejudice reduction-

When we have egalitarian self images we may be
motivated to suppress prejudice. Indeed failing to do so
and subsequently being confronted with instances in
which we have personally behaved in a prejudiced fashion
can lead to feelings of guilt for having violated our
personal standards. But what about when we are member
of a group that has a history of being prejudiced toward
another group might we feel guilt by association, even if
we have not personally behaved in a prejudiced fashion?
Considerable research has now revealed that people can
feel collective guilt based on
the actions of other members of their group when they are
confronted with the harm that their groups prejudice
toward another group has produced.

• Can we learn to “Just say no” to stereotypes?-

We have noted that the tendency to think about others in
terms of the group membership is a vital factor in the
occurrence and persistence of several forms of prejudice
to the extent that people want to be egalitarian, it may be
possible to train them so that the automatic activation of
stereotypes is reduced and they can therefore behave
according to their egalitarian principles as we described
previously we acquire stereotypes by learning to associate
certain characteristics with various racial or ethnic
groups; Once such automatic association are formed
common members of these groups can serve as primes for
racial or ethnic stereotypes which are then automatically
activated can we actively break the stereotype habit by
saying no to the stereotype traits we associate with the
specific group?
People can learn to not rely on stereotypes they already
possess although we do not yet know how to reduce
stereotype activation influences actual interactions with
group members, the possibility that people can learn to
say no to racial and ethnic stereotypes with practice in
doing so is encouraging.

MARRIAGE-
ATTITUDETOWARDS QUESTIONNAIRE

• AIM: To study the inter generational differences

in attitude towards marriage.
METHODOLOGY:
Sample of the study–
The sample of the study constituted subjects from two
groups: a group of
50 students (Group I) and a group of 50 parents (Group II)
from class 12th E (humanities stream).
• MATERIAL USED:
The materials used for the study were–
1. Calculator, pen, pencil etc.
2. Self constructed five points rating scale on
attitude towards marriage.
3. Self constructed short structured interview schedule.
 INSTRUCTIONS:
For rating scale –
“I shall present to use some statements expressing
opinion towards marriage. You may agree with some of
the statements while disagree with the others. Against
the statements, you will find 5 responses alternatively
like- strongly agree (SA), agree (A), neutral (N), disagree
(D), strongly disagree (SD). Put a tick on the column of
your choice according to your opinion towards the given
statements. “For the short structured interview– “I shall
ask a few questions, regarding your views on marriage.
You will have to respond according to your opinions
towards the questions. There is no right or wrong answer,
so feel free to answer.”
PROCEDURE
The procedure of the study was divided into four phases:
PHASE I
Construction of the scale A list of statements based on
several views regarding marriage were collected from
students and the internet. The statements were selected
on the basis of a common theme as describing different
views on marriage. The items were framed in both positive
and negative manner. The statements were kept short,
simple and easy to comprehend. It was also avoided to use
irrelevant or targeted statements. The scoring key for
positively worded statements was [5, 4, 3, 2, 1] and for
negatively worded statements was [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]. Items 1, 3,
5, 7, 9, 10 were
negatively worded and items 2, 4, 6, 8 were positively
worded.
PHASE II
Administration and scoring of the scale The attitude sale
was administered to class 12th (humanities) students and
their parents. The subjects were asked to join the items in
the attitude scale against 5 responses– strongly agree
(SA), agree (A), neutral (N), disagree (D), strongly
disagree (SD). The score of each response was added up
to obtain the total score of each subject of group I and II,
separately. The total score obtained by adding the score
of all groups in group I and all parents in group II. After
pooling, the data was subjected to further calculations of
mean and standard deviation.
PHASE III
Calculation of mean and quantitative comparison The
calculation of mean an attitude score for the two groups
was done on the basis that means score, a difference was
analyzed between the scores of group I and II, which were
interpreted to be inter generational differences in attitude
towards marriage. It was seen that “more the score on the
attitude scale the more favorable the attitude towards
marriage.”
•PHASE IV
Construction of short structure interview Based on the
statement rating scale a short structured interview
schedule was prepared with the purpose of exploring
reasons as to why a particular response was chosen by the
subject. With the answers provided by subjects, their
views became more clear and quantitative results became
validated as they were supported with proper reason and
logic as given by subjects. In the preparation for the
interview schedule, it was kept in mind that the subject
was well motivated to speak their minds for his/her clear
opinion.

TABLE:
OBSERVATION
S. NO. Scores Deviati Sq. of SELF
(x) on (x- deviation Table 1 shows
m) (x¹)² the scores the
1. 33 10 100
scores,
2. 30 7 49
3. 32 9 81 computation of
4. 23 0 0 mean and
5. 32 9 81 standard
6. 23 0 0 deviation for the
7. 34 11 121 submitted scores
8. 31 8 64 of students on
9. 32 9 81 the attitude
10. 30 7 49 towards marriage
11. 28 5 25 question
12. 29 6 36
13. 32 9 81
14. 31 8 64
15. 30 7 49
16. 33 10 100
 Interview Schedule
Theme -10 : Re-marriages of Women.
Question: Re-marriages are more unacceptable in a society
for women as compared to men.
★STUDENT’S
RESPONSE (Group 1) : Agree
Answer : According to me, although our society has
become quite progressive and accepting yet
discrimination and injustice against women has not
vanished yet. A woman who is divorced and living in
another relationship is seen through disrespectful
eyes. Her independent nature is not appreciated but
instead criticized. Hence, women specially in Indian
and Muslim societies have to face a lot of critical
★PARENTS
judgement from the society when it comes to re-
marriage.
RESPONSE (Group 2) : Strongly
Disagree Answer : According to my parent,
today’s society does not
discriminate an individual be it a man or a woman, on
the basis of their marital status. People happily accept
women who are ready for remarriages.
 CONCLUSION
There were little discrepancies found while observing the
interview responses of parents and students. The main
scores show a slight difference in the attitude of parents
and children towards marriage. Somehow, the attitude of
students was found to be less favorable than parents but
not much can be seen if we consider the qualitative
analysis. To conclude, through quantitative analysis, there
was a mean score difference but through qualitative
analysis is not a very high level of difference in the
attitude of parent and child has been observed in this
study, which is indicative of a stereotype regarding
marriage and nowadays parents and students both are
equally sensitive towards concepts of marriage and they
have a logical as well as favorable attitude towards
marriage.
 Bibliography
1. Learn psychology.org
2.Psychology by Robert A.
Baron 3.Oxford learning.org