Attribution

Question 1

Attribution definition

Answer 1

process of identifying a cause for an outcome

Question 2

Attribution bias definition

Answer 2

distortion or error in process of making an attribution

Question 3

Heider, 1958 - attribution theory

Answer 3

looked at how attribution met basic human needs
find out why outcomes occur, especially if negative so we can avoid occurrence of it again
look at internal versus external attributions
process of making attribution in everyday life is similar to that used in professional science - construction of causal theories - we are all naive psychologists

Question 4

Internal vs external attributions

Answer 4

internal = assign cause of behaviour to internal characteristic
external = assign cause of behaviour to situation/event outside of the person's control

Question 5

Ichheiser, 1943 - attribution bias

Answer 5

contributed to attribution bias
develop notion that culturally located ideas shape our attribution process
more radical as an approach
argues social psychologists are unknowingly biased
so people have a bias towards making dispositional attributions rather than situational attributions
this is not just a cognitive phenomenon - it is a result of ideology - because we live in an individualistic culture we make individual attributions

Question 6

Jones and Davis, 1965 - correspondent inference theory

Answer 6

people pay particular attention to intentional behaviour
theory helps understanding of internal attribution process
- we do this most when correspondence between motive and behaviour (intention)
5 sources to allow us to make correspondent inference
- choice, accidental/intentional behaviour, social desirability, hedonistic relevance and personalism

Question 7

Hewstone, 1989

Answer 7

sees correspondent inference theory as key to their own theory
want to distinguish between motivation and cognitive biases
motivational = arising from interests, intentions
cognitive = information-processing issues or limitations

Question 8

Critical evaluation of correspondent inference theory

Answer 8

Hewstone, 1989 - raises question about emphasis on intent and non-chosen behaviour - questions whether or not trait attributions should be considered equivalent to causal calculations
CIT is template for much other research into attributions - so good in that sense
Does little to outline how we calculate and choose between alternative attributions of behaviours

Question 9

Covariation model of causal attribution

Kelley, 1967

Answer 9

arguable most influential model of attribution
idealised model of how we can and should make attributions when we have enough time, information and motivation
to understand the model you need to understand different reasoning dimensions - consensus, distinctiveness and consistency

Question 10

Consensus, distinctiveness and consistency 1

Answer 10

part of covariation model - Kelley, 1967
model aims to express precisely the reasoning processes behind ideal attributions
like Heider we look at internal or external cause
subdivision of external cause - stimulus and circumstance
3 types of causal information influence judgement - CDC

Question 11

Consensus, distinctiveness and consistency 2

Answer 11

consensus - extent to which other people behave in the same way
distinctiveness = extent to which person’s reaction/behaviour is same in similar situations
consistency = extent to which person and others react in same way to stimulus
low consistency = discounting attribution
high consensus, distinctiveness and consistency = external attribution
low consensus, distinctiveness and consistency = internal attribution

Question 12

Critical evaluation of covariation model

Answer 12

process leads to an attribution in which there were either multiple necessary causes or multiple sufficient causes - what about attributions that cannot be placed in these boxes?
this issue is addressed in Kelley’s following model - configuration model, 1972 - addresses the issue that original model was not useful in making everyday attributions

Question 13

Configuration model - Kelley, 1972

Answer 13

looks at the way we look for a broad fit between outcome and rough configuration of possible causes of that outcome
uses a causal schema
exceptional occurrences = number of different contributory causes are necessary –> multiple necessary cause schema needed
common occurrences = one cause may be sufficient –> multiple sufficient cause schema needed
in cases where we do not have all information we use this model

Question 14

Critical evaluation of Kelley’s two models

Answer 14

experiments are not representative of everyday attribution processing - covariation experiments give all the information needed (not representative)
experiments split information into consensus, distinctiveness and consistency - not done in real life
internal vs external causes - people want to know more than just this - internal or external attribution does not identify specific cause of outcome explanation
configuration model says multiple causes can be sufficient - then no one case is identified alone
McArthur, 1972 - there may be deviations from this rational ideal, pps likely to under-use consensus information

Question 15

Attribution bias

Answer 15

influential biases include:
fundamental attribution error (FAE)
actor-observer differences
self-biases
inter-group biases

Question 16

Fundamental Attribution Error

Answer 16

distinction between internal and external causes is essential to FAE
attributions tend to have extra value placed on internal factors - overestimating them - and less value on external causes - underestimating them
we make internal attributions even when there is clear external explanation
Jones and Harris, 1967 - Castro study - shows this bias

Question 17

Jones and Harris, 1967

Answer 17

support for FAE
pps rate attitudes of speechwriters (how pro or anti Castro they were)
half pps told writer had choice in direction of speech, half pps told opposite
those believing they had a choice believed pro-Castro speeches to be written be pro-Castro people and vice versa
those told of no choice still largely believed the attitude of speech reflected individual attitude
highlights underestimation of external factors

Question 18

Cognitive explanation for FAE

Answer 18

emphasis on information-processing constraints - ways in which our cognitive limitations may give rise to error
Rholes and Pryor, 1982 - people notice and focus on person not situation
Peterson, 1980 - dispositional shift - emphasis on dispositional factors for longer before making attribution - limitations in coping with all information leads to this overestimation
Lerner, 1980 - motivated to hold certain beliefs - preference in most societies for believing individuals are responsible

Question 19

Criticism of FAE

Answer 19

certain features of experiments themselves may lead to demand characteristics
cross-cultural research challenges notion that FAE is universal or fundamental
emphasis on attribution as purely cognitive phenomenon can be questioned by approaches that pay attention to what attribution talk can be found to do in interaction

Question 20

Actor-observer differences

Answer 20

idea that people emphasise internal causes but only when accounting for behaviour of others
external attributions made for our own behaviours
Nisbett et al., 1973 - perhaps because we have more information about our own situations - greater knowledge of another equated with situational attributions for them
Regan and Totten, 1975 - empathic attribution - where our empathy lies whether we make internal or external attribution to others

Question 21

Alternative account for actor-observer differences

Answer 21

our perceptual focus is important
we blame what we see - we attribute only to what we can observe
actors see the situation, while the visual field of observers may be dominated by the other person

Question 22

Criticisms of actor-observer differences

a/o/d = actor-observer differences

Answer 22

Watson, 1982 - causes of differences in attribution researched, maybe should look at effects of differences in situational attributions - less radical bias
Demand characteristics in experiences
Malle et al., 2007 - meta-analysis of studies into a/o/d - variations in results suggest findings not robust - only for negative outcomes - reversed for positive outcomes
- folk-conceptual model - important to distinguish reason explanations from causal history explanations

Question 23

Self-biases

Answer 23

argues attributions vary according to explaining successes or failures
self-serving bias - most well known
–attribute personal success to internal cause
–attribute personal failure to external cause
different types of self-serving bias
— self-enhancing - success to internal cause, take credit
— self-protecting - failure to external cause, deny responsibility
— self-effacing - success to external cause and failure to internal cause

Question 24

Kingdon, 1967

Answer 24

support for self-serving bias
examined politician talk
internal causes if politician had been successful and vice versa

Question 25

Mezulis et al., 2004

Answer 25

support for self-serving bias
meta-analysis of 266 studies addressing issue of self-serving bias
support for importance of a self-serving bias
found some variation in self-serving bias depending on culture
western cultures had higher self-serving bias than Asian cultures

Question 26

Fiske and Taylor, 1991

Answer 26

idea of schema can conceptualise how self-serving bias can identify attributions
schemas = structures of information about any given feature so out attributions about ourselves may be consistent with these schemas

Question 27

Critical evaluation of self-bias

Answer 27

has support from studies but may not account for significant discrepancies
issues of cross-cultural differences - attributions to success and failures may reflect specific cultural perspective not universal feature of attribution process

Question 28

Inter-group biases

Answer 28

perception of identity of person to be attributed biases our processing
group-relevant outcomes may be shaped by sense of our own and other’s group identities - can link to FAE
looks at the way in which our sense of the group that person belongs to can shape our attributions
Taylor and Jaggi, 1974
Pettigrew, 1979
Hewstone, 1989

Question 29

Taylor and Jaggi, 1974

Answer 29

model of ethnocentric attribution
positive behaviours for in-group members attributed to internal causes but for out-groups to external causes
negative behaviours for in-group attributed to external causes but for out-groups to internal causes

Question 30

Pettigrew, 1979

Answer 30

developed inter-group bias framework
out-group successes seen as due to luck - external factors
biased inter-group attributions can maintain presumed negative view of the out-group and positive view on the in-group

Question 31

Hewstone, 1989 - inter-group biases

Answer 31

only way to challenge negative expectations of out-groups to reduce inter-group conflict depends on exposing group members to experiences of positive out-group behaviour and enabling them to see such behaviours as common

Question 32

Inter-group biases - sex stereotypes

Answer 32

encouraging stereotype-consistent phenomena is likely to result in the in-group and out-group stereotypical attributions
Deaux, 1976 - found major attributional differences depending on sex
– male success attributed to ability
– female success attributed to luck or effort

Question 33

Critical evaluation of inter-group biases

Answer 33

broadens attribution theory by looking at group perspective
Deaux’s work questions extent to which attribution is determined by whether or not the target of attribution is seen as member of in-group or out-group

Question 34

Societal attributions

Answer 34

Ichheiser - sees what has become known as FAE as reflection of ideology within societies that emphasise self-determination

Question 35

Societal representations

Answer 35

idea of socially shared understandings that change over time
Moscovici, 1976
- idea of shared frameworks for making sense of world is not simple top-down indoctrination but far more subtle
- social representations often entail attributional or explanatory elements
- major importance in the interactional context of representations