Editing Vested interest (communication theory) (section)

==Components==
There are five key components that may diminish or enhance the effects of vested interest on [[attitude-behavior consistency]]. These are (a) stake, (b) attitudinal salience, (c) the certainty of the attitude outcome link, (d) the immediacy of attitude-implicated consequences, and (e) the [[self-efficacy]] of the individual to perform an attitudinally implicated act. Attitudes affect behavior. However, social psychologists recognize that contextual, [[interpsychic]], and [[intrapsychic]] sources of variation can drastically affect the strength of this relation. A factor that has been shown to strongly affect attitude-behavior consistency is [[Self|self-interest]] or vested interest.<ref name="Brewer & Crano 1994">{{cite book |last1=Brewer |first1=M.B. |last2=Crano |first2=W.D. |title=Social psychology |date=1994 |publisher=West Pub. Co (West Group) |location=Minneapolis/St. Paul |isbn=0314028404 |edition=[1. Dr.]}}</ref> The following sections explain each of these variables in greater detail.

===Stake===
Stake refers to the perceived personal consequence of an attitude that is directly related to the intensity of vested interest and influences components that contribute to attitude-behavior consistency. In its basic form, the more that is at stake concerning a particular issue, the stronger the attitude will be. Consequently, as attitude strength increases, the consistency of attitude-based actions also increases.<ref name="Crano"/>

Referring to the concept of vested interest as it relates to attitude-behavior consistency, stake is an individual's macro involvement in a particular situation where the consequence is salient.<ref name="Anker, Feeley, & Kim">{{cite journal |last1=Anker |first1=A.E. |last2=Feeley |first2=T.H. |last3=Kim |first3=H. |title=Examining the Attitude-Behavior Relationship in Prosocial Donation Domains |journal=Journal of Applied Social Psychology |date=2010 |volume=40 |issue=6 |pages=1293–1324 |doi=10.1111/j.1559-1816.2010.00619.x |issn=0021-9029}}</ref>  In a situation where stake is operationalized using certainly and immediacy, one found the likely effect of this was behavior relative to the immediate consequence, positive or negative.<ref name="Anker, Feeley, & Kim" /> For instance, in a study conducted to measure the relevance stake has on vested interest, students given a health assessment showed greater enthusiasm for items inquiring about donating blood when saving a life was salient (i.e. a child's life depends on my donation).<ref name="Anker, Feeley, & Kim" />

Stake may contribute to attitude-behavior consistency by inducing thoughts that support the attitude. This serves as the basis for future behavior. Stake may also strengthen the attitude-behavior relation by indirectly amplifying the awareness of stimuli associated with people's attitudes. Stake is the most powerful impression that comes from all the components of vested interest regarding attitude and behavior. Stake influences perceptions of attitude and action, but also of other action-relevant components as well. When stake is high, people also find the critical issue highly salient. Stake also affects the perception of immediacy. The greater the personal consequence of the issue, the more pressing the issue is perceived to be. Finally, stake was found to affect the perception of immediacy. The greater the personal consequence of the issue, the more pressing it was perceived to be. The phrases, "the stakes are/were high" or "high stakes", are used when issues of high salience or immediacy are raised, usually in regards to gambling or other high-risk activities involving vested interest.

===Salience===
[[social salience|Salience]] refers to the perceiver's awareness of the effects of an attitude upon himself.<ref name="Crano"/> In other words, the prominence of an issue, as perceived by an individual, shapes the strength of his resulting attitude. Salient attitudes have a greater effect directly on subsequent behavior. Linking this discovery to vested interest, the research concluded that the salience effect was heightened when the attitude had important personal outcomes for someone. When the consequences of the behavior issuing from an attitude are highly salient, attitude-behavior consistency increases. If consequences are not salient, the consistency of the effects of vested interest on attitude behavior will be dramatically reduced. For instance, two people may have negative attitudes towards living near a prison. The first person lost a loved one at the hands of an inmate who escaped during a jailbreak. The second person simply does not like the eyesore the prison building creates in the area around his home. The first person's attitude towards inmates and prisons will probably be more salient than that of the second person who has not experienced a similar trauma. The first person's more salient attitude will foster the operation of vested interest, which will result in greater attitude-behavior consistency.

Attitudes that have been acquired through direct experience, such as the example just given, may be more salient than those acquired through vicarious processes. This greater salience results in greater consistency in attitude behavior. The attitude of someone who is non-salient reduces vested interest and weakens attitude-behavior consistency. The most powerful impression to emerge from all the analyses is the overwhelming effect of stake, or personal consequence, on attitude and behavior. When stake is high, people assume that a person would find the critical issue highly salient. Stake does not interact with, but enhances the perception of, issue salience. This is an important effect, because salience significantly affects actions that are expected to happen.

Additionally, salience can be described as the most recent and accessible memory associated with a specific object (i.e. idea) in which an individual has developed their own unique attitude.<ref name="Bradley & Miller">{{cite journal |last1=Bradley |first1=A. |last2=Miller |first2=C. |title=Vested Interest: Developing Scales for Assessing Flooding Preparedness |journal=Disaster Prevention and Management |date=2016 |volume=25 |issue=3 |pages=283–285 |issn=0965-3562}}</ref>  Mortality, for instance, would become salient when faced with a situation where death was probable or the known death of a friend, relative or an experienced event which resulting in someone's death.  This death salience would then influence behavior for a short amount of time following the event.<ref name="Pashak et al.">{{cite journal |last1=Pashak |first1=T. |last2=Oswald |first2=S.R. |last3=Justice |first3=M.D. |last4=Seely |first4=L.T. |last5=Burns |first5=B.R. |last6=Sheperd |first6=S. |title=You are Alive Right Now: An Experimental Exploration of The Interplay Between Existential Salience, Mental Health, and Death Anxiety |journal=College Student Journal |date=2017 |volume=51 |issue=4 |pages=452–453 |issn=0146-3934}}</ref>

===Certainty===
Certainty refers to perceived [[likelihood]] of personal consequences as a result of an attitude or action.<ref name="Crano"/> Simply stated, if a certain course of action is taken, then the chances of a specific event occurring as a result of this action are evaluated by the perceiver to help shape his resultant attitudes and behaviors. Certainty can be easily applied to situations in which an individual knowingly takes a calculated risk. For instance, let's continue with our aforementioned example of people living near a prison. Although the chance of a prison escape is minimal, particularly in a maximum-security prison, it could occur and crimes against those living close by would increase. Those living further away from the prison might argue that a prison break is unlikely and that there is no real risk. Alternatively, those living close to the prison could make an equally valid argument about the dangers of living near the prison in the event of prisoners escaping. Still others might realize there to be a potential risk to their safety, but would not deem it risky enough to move elsewhere.

Certainty in attitude, relative to vested interest, remains difficult to define without an understanding of two particular concepts.  One is the acceptance of truth in the events or idea requiring approximation of occurrence.  Two requires that certainty is not dependent on external factors which can undermine its validity.<ref name="Bolyard">{{cite journal |last1=Bolyard |first1=C. |title=Truth and Certainty in Peter Auriol |journal=Vivarium |date=2015 |volume=53 |issue=1 |pages=45–48 |issn=0042-7543 |doi=10.1163/15685349-12341290}}</ref>  Certainty must be a concept which is pushed onto us much like truth is a certainty beyond our immediate control.<ref name="Bolyard" />

If the consequences of an attitude consistent act are uncertain, attitude-consistent action is not likely to occur, due to the fact that vested interest will be reduced. An example of this is a person who has a negative attitude towards living near a prison. If the person assumes that the link between living near a prison and being a victim of a violent crime is minimal, then health and safety promoting behaviors consistent with this negative attitude are not likely. However, if someone believes that living near the prison and being a victim of a violent crime is almost certain, that person would be unlikely to move close to the prison, assuming the person has a positive attitude toward safety or a negative attitude toward prisons and inmates.

===Immediacy===
Immediacy refers to an individual's perceived amount of time between an action and its resulting consequences.<ref name="Crano"/> Immediacy can be considered an extension of certainty, however, these two entities are completely separate. For instance, in our prison example, people in opposition to the construction of the prison in their neighborhood may have felt that the amount of time to build the prison to and the eventual housing of prisoners was not long enough to make an informed decision. They may also feel that it is only a matter of time before something negative happened to the local citizens as a result of having a prison nearby.

Immediacy refers to the apparent temporary lag between an attitudinally implicated action and its consequences. If the results of an attitude consistent action are thought to be immediate rather than delayed, the effects of stake, or vested interest, on attitude-behavior consistency will be more dramatic. In other words, if a person living near the prison in the previous example perceives the possibility of a jailbreak could occur at a much later time in life, he may act in manner that is not consistent. This is because the lack of immediate consequences reduces the perception of vested interest. Therefore, immediacy can help explain self-destructive behaviors.

Immediacy, in vested interest,  can also be thought of in terms of positive or negative consequence disassociated from a timeline.  Vested interest such as organ donation, for example, make life and death salient which brings about the concept of immediacy to decide not necessarily to act.<ref name="Siegel, et al.">{{cite journal |last1=Siegel |first1=Jason T. |last2=Alvaro |first2=Eusebio M. |last3=Lac |first3=Andrew |last4=Crano |first4=William D. |last5=Dominick |first5=Alexander |title=Intentions of Becoming a Living Organ Donor Among Hispanics: A Theory-Based Approach Exploring Differences Between Living and Nonliving Organ Donation |journal=Journal of Health Communication |date=8 February 2008 |volume=13 |issue=1 |pages=80–99 |doi=10.1080/10810730701807142|pmid=18307137 |s2cid=1964668 }}</ref>  This is seen in a mechanism which allows people to agree to donate organs in the event of their death (i.e. drivers licenses).<ref name="Siegel, et al." />

Another example of immediacy is that of marketing companies who implement immediacy to encourage consumers to act or remain inactive. If what they market is something a person is highly vested in and the marketing firm has simultaneously created an immediate need, then they have done their job to get consumers to behave as they desired. This use of immediacy can be both helpful and harmful. Consumers who are not well versed in how marketing works may find themselves situations they did not wish to be in. However, consumers who are cognizant of how marketing works may find this very useful in how they do or do not expend their resources.

===Self-efficacy===
[[Self-efficacy]] in regards to vested interest, is the amount that an individual believes that they are capable of performing an action associated with an attitude or advocated position.<ref name="Crano"/> In short, it is a person's sense of competence in regards to a specific task. Continuing with our prison example, residents with high vested interest that was covered by the other four components would need self-efficacy to protest the location of the new prison. In other words, the residents opposing the prison would have to believe in their abilities to effectively stop the construction. Conversely, if they lacked self-efficacy and therefore believed there was nothing they could do, then they would not act on their held attitude and vested interest will not have been attained. Variations in self-efficacy will produce differences in perceptions of the likelihood of someone working against the opposed plan. Higher levels of manipulated self-efficacy result in higher levels of expected action. However, variations in stake also influence perceptions of self-efficacy. When the stakes are high, people assume higher levels of perceived self-efficacy.

Another way the concept of self-efficacy can be described is using [[social cognitive theory]] to understand the role thought, drive and emotion have on self-efficacy (20).  Cognitively, one works to quantify actions, emotion, and drive resulting in self-efficacy.  However, this concept remains volatile as a change in one or more of these influences degrades self-efficacy.<ref name="Pattanaik & Sia">{{cite journal |last1=Pattanaik |first1=S. |last2=Sia |first2=N. |title=Self-Efficacy, Political Efficacy and Political Orientation |journal=Indian Journal of Health and Wellbeing |date=2015 |volume=6 |issue=2 |pages=222–225 |issn=2229-5356}}</ref>  An example of this would be physical fitness, in that, elevated or decreased self-efficacy will cause one to accept or deny a strenuous task daily.<ref name="Pattanaik & Sia" />