those surrounding us
Personality and Behavior
How well do personality traits predict behavior?
Personality traits: an internal state or disposition that
produces consistent behavior in different situations
is stable over time
people view each other in terms of personality, especially:
extraversion
agreeableness
conscientiousness
emotional stability (neuroticism)
openness
traits do not predict behavior as much as we think
Mischel (1968) - honesty
meta-analysis showed honesty correlation of 0.30
honest in one situation, but not another
hartstone & may (1928) - helpfulness
average correlation for each person - 0.23
Helped in one situation, but not another
Attribution Theory
how we explain other people’s behavior
make two types of attributions
internal: it is something about the person whose behavior we are explaining
external: it is something outside of the person whose behavior we are explaining
Kelly’s Covariation Model
look at the characteristics of a particular behavior at a particular time
compare it with what you know about previous related examples
make either internal or external attribution
three pieces of important information
consensus: how does the actor’s behavior toward a stimulus compare to other people’s behavior toward a stimulus?
distinctiveness: how does the actor’s behavior toward a stimulus compare to the actor’s behavior toward other stimuli?
consistency: is the actor’s behavior toward that stimulus always the same?
Kelley's Covariation Model Example
Why did Joe kick Fideo?
consensus: do other people also kick Fido?
yes = high consensus, no = low consensus
distinctiveness: does Joe kick only Fido, not other dogs?
yes = high distinctiveness, no = low distinctiveness
consistency: does Joe always kick Fido?
yes = high consistency, no = low consistency
Making Attributions
internal attribution - it's something about Joe
low consensus (no one else kicks Joe)
low distinctiveness (Joe kicks all dogs)
high consistency (Joe always kicks Fido)
external attribution - it’s something with Fido
high consensus (everyone kicks Fideo)
high distinctiveness (Joe kicks only Fido)
high consistency (Joe always kicks Fido)
Low Consistency
Unique occurrence is difficult to classify
external attribution made to the particular circumstance
a situational attribution
Fundamental Attribution Error
tendency to assume that people’s behavior matches their internal states
we expect that people’s values, beliefs, opinions, etc., will determine their behavior
AND ignore the effect of situation or context
more likely to commit the FAE for others’ behaviors than our own behaviors
especially true when action is undesirable
tendency is so strong, we may even see it where we should not
Jones and Harris (1967)
participants read an essay that was pro- or anti- Castro
participants were told the writer either had or did not have a choice about which essay to write
participants asked to guess the writer's attitude toward Castro
FAE and Culture
Westerners and East Asia
show the FAE
East Asian more likely to take the situation into account as well
Influences on the FAE
two step process to make attributions
assume behavior is due to something about the person
correct for citation if necessary/able
perceptual salience → actor/observer difference
things that we perceive influence our attribution
Howard Dean and Actor/Observer
Camera on Dean
Mic amplified only his voice
Ignored situation around him
Camera from audience
Mic amplified his voice and the crowd
Includes situation around him
FAE and First Impressions
FAE more commonly applied to those we don't know
First impressions matter
first impressions formed very quickly
“thin-slicing” research shows good accuracy of perceptions
experience a primary effect: what we learn first about someone impacts perceptions
impressions last via belief perseverance
FAE and the Self
make self-serving attributions: explanations for our behaviors that make us look good
my successes are due to internal, dispositional factors
my failures are due to external, situational factors
False Consensus
another way we feel good about the self
false consensus: the tendency to think our own choices and opinions are more common than they are
common when the situation is ambiguous