Attribution Theory Lecture Review

Attribution Theory

Attribution theory investigates how we explain ourselves and others, focusing on causal attributions—describing how we explain the causes of behavior and events in our lives.

Causal Attributions

What are attributions?

Attributions refer to the processes by which individuals explain the causes of behavior and events. They encompass the perceptions and evaluations made regarding why someone acted in a certain way or why an event occurred.

Why use them?

Using attributions helps individuals make sense of their experiences, providing a framework for understanding their interactions and the behaviors of those around them. This influenced how they navigate social situations and their emotional responses.

Explanatory Style

The explanatory style is defined as a habitual way of explaining events. It operates on three dimensions:

  1. Internal vs. External: Internal attributions assign the cause of an event to the self, while external attributions ascribe it to outside factors.

  2. Stable vs. Unstable: Stable attributions suggest that the cause is permanent, while unstable attributions consider the cause temporary.

  3. Global vs. Specific: Global attributions imply that a cause affects many areas of life, whereas specific ones indicate limited impact.

These three dimensions can lead to two styles:

  • Pessimistic: Typically involves external, unstable, and specific causes for failures.

  • Optimistic: Often includes internal, stable, and global attributions for negative events.

Research on Explanatory Style

Academic Success & Explanatory Styles

  • Peterson & Barrett (1987) explored the correlation between explanatory style and academic success.

  • Research has shown that an optimistic explanatory style is associated with better performance in educational settings.

Health & Longevity

  • The Harvard longitudinal study of adult development (Peterson, 2000) demonstrated that individuals with an optimistic outlook tend to have better health outcomes and longer life spans.

Errors in Causal Attribution

Some Definitions

  • Dispositional attributions: Assign the cause of behavior to internal characteristics such as personality traits.

  • Situational attributions: Explain behavior as influenced by external factors or circumstances.

  • Actor vs. Observer: This distinction highlights how an individual may attribute their own actions differently than they would when judging others.

  • Correspondence Bias vs. Fundamental Attribution Error: Both concepts involve the tendency to overemphasize dispositional factors in others' behaviors while minimizing situational influences.

Correspondence Bias

Study by Jones & Harris (1967)

  • Independent Variables (IVs):

    • Essay topic (pro- vs. anti-Castro)

    • Condition under which Fred wrote the essay (choice vs. no choice)

  • Dependent Variable (DV): Rating of Fred’s attitude toward Castro, measured on a negative to positive scale.

Results

The findings of the study suggested evidence of correspondence bias, with the statistical significance of results denoted as $p < .05$. The observed attitudes were linked to whether Fred’s essay was perceived as chosen freely or coerced (via methods such as coin flips and arguments provided).

More Recent Research

Study by Von Boven et al. (1999)

  • Participants were randomly assigned to roles as either questioners or responders, where the questioners chose predetermined responses. This further examined perceptions of the responder's altruism based on the assumptions of corresponding behavior.

Culture & the Correspondence Bias

Study by Choi & Nisbett (1998)

  • Subject Variable: Culture (US vs. Korea)

  • IVs:

    • Exposure to no-choice essay writing (yes vs. control)

    • Condition under which “Fred” wrote the essay (choice vs. no choice)

  • The experimental design explored cultural influences on the correspondence bias, with revealing data showing divergence  in responses between American and Korean participants.

Fundamental Attribution Error (FAE)

The fundamental attribution error is described as the tendency for individuals to explain others' behaviors primarily in terms of dispositional factors, disregarding situational influences.

Explanation of FAE

This phenomenon occurs because individuals often lack knowledge about the situational circumstances affecting another person's behavior.

Study by Ross et al. (1977)

  • Methods: The Trivial Bowl Experiment investigated knowledge ratings assigned by different roles in a quiz context (quizmaster, contestant, observer).

  • Dependent Variable (DV): Knowledge ratings measured as a percentile.

Results

The findings showed a significant distinction in ratings between the quizmaster and contestants, with knowledge ratings spread, suggesting a strong bias towards dispositional judgments. Results did not show statistical significance across all roles.

How “Fundamental” is the FAE?

Studies Examined

  • **Schweder & Bourne (1982)

  • Morris & Peng (1994)

  • Miller (1984)**

These studies explored the degree to which the FAE is fundamental across cultures and age groups, indicating variations in attribution dependent on individualist versus collectivist perspectives.

Results of Miller (1984)

The results illustrated an increased percentage of dispositional attributions, particularly among participants in U.S. versus Indian cultural contexts across different age groups.

Summary of Individual and Cultural Perspectives

  • Both individualist and collectivist cultures exhibit susceptibility to the Correspondence Bias (CB).

  • Collectivists may demonstrate a reverse Fundamental Attribution Error (FAE).

  • These findings prompt questions about underlying mechanisms for individualist tendencies to overemphasize dispositional attributions.

The Actor-Observer Bias aka Actor-Observer Asymmetry

The actor-observer bias represents the discrepancy often observed between how actors attribute their behaviors versus how observers attribute the same behaviors.

Example & Mechanisms

  1. Knowledge of the Actor: This involves the relative familiarity an individual has with themselves compared to others, affecting the attributions made.

  2. Perceptual Salience: What individuals notice—either themselves as actors or others as observers—can impact attribution.

Study by Nisbett et al. (1973)

  • The IV was the knowledge of the target, testing perceptions across various known typical individuals, including self, best friend, or public figures.

  • Dependent Variable (DV): Ratings based on trait descriptors.

Results

The findings supported the proposed hypothesis, reflecting a preference to frame descriptions in dispositional terms when observing others as compared to oneself.

Perceptual Salience

This concept suggests that what is salient or noticeable in a social situation influences whether an attribution is situational or dispositional.

Research Examples

Lassiter & Irvine (1986+)

  • IV: Different perceptual focuses in a video (focusing on the suspect, the detective, or equal emphasis).

  • DVs: Perceived coercion and likelihood of guilt rated on a Likert scale.

Results

Showed distinct features of how perceptual focus can sway attributions.

Research Example 2: Deiner & Wallbom (1976)

  • IV: Presence or absence of a mirror affecting awareness and perception of social norms.

  • DV: Measured percentage of cheating behavior across conditions.

Results

The study showcased significant differences in cheating based on the presence of a mirror, emphasizing the role of self-perception on behavioral choices.

Summary of Behavioral Attributions

We engage in attributions regarding our behaviors and those of others continuously. These can be useful or harmful. Errors in causal attribution arise due to:

  • Socialization methods.

  • Familiarity with the targets of attributions.

  • Elements that are most perceptually salient during observation.

Emotion Attributions

Understanding Our Feelings

Understanding how we know what we are feeling involves cognitive evaluations of physiological arousal and the contextual situation these feelings arise from.

Two-Factor Theory of Emotion

This theory posits that we determine our emotional state through:

  • Physiological arousal: Changes in bodily states tied to emotions.

  • Situational context: The specific circumstances or events occurring when experiencing emotions.

This evaluation can lead to both correct and incorrect attributions about our emotional states, which may shape emotions that would otherwise not occur.

Study by Schachter & Singer (1962)

  • Independent Variables: Controlled for arousal (placebo, epinephrine-informed, epinephrine-uninformed) and situational contexts (euphoria vs. anger).

  • Dependent Variables: Emotion measured through self-reports and facial expressions.

Results

The findings confirmed the two-factor theory, showing that emotional experiences are influenced by physiological states and situational context.

Overall Summary

Attributions significantly affect how we interpret successes and failures, our behaviors, the actions of others, and even our emotional experiences. Though these attributions may be impacted by biases or inaccuracies, they are generally functional enough to justify their continued use in interpreting the social world around us.