Attributions Flashcards
Heiders three main principles of Naive Psychology?
Motivated
Stable traits- aids predictions
Internal vs external
1- Our behaviour and the behaviour of others is motivated
2- Look for STABLE TRAITS behind peoples behaviour- this aids predictions
3- Internal (dispositional) versus external (situational) causes
In an internal, or dispositional, attribution, people infer that an event or a person’s behavior is due to personal factors such as traits, abilities, or feelings. In an external, or situational, attribution, people infer that a person’s behavior is due to situational factors.
Correspondent inference theory
Weiners attribution theory- locus of control- internal vis external
Stability
Controllability
The act reflects some true characteristics of the person:
Cues- The act was freely chosen, not sociably desirable
Kelley Covariation Model: ANOVA model- attribute causes of behaviour to factor that which covaries most closely with that behaviour
CCCCCCCCCC
CO-variation model
Consistency (all the time vs some of the time)
Consensus (what is everyone else doing)
Distinctiveness (Only this comedian or every comedian)
Consistency must always be high- otherwise cause is discounted
If ALL are high then attribution externally
if C and D are low then attribution internally
Problems with the co-variation model?
Co-variation is not always causation
People won’t always use these 3 dimensions
Weiners Attribution Theory
Locus of control
Stability
Controllability
Locus of control- Actor (internal) vs situation (external)
Stability- is the internal or external cause stable or not- consistent or unusual
Controllability (future performance under actors control))- e.g. effort or luck
Define Locus of control
The degree to which someone believes they have control over the outcome of events in their lives, as opposed to external forces beyond their control
Biases in attributions
Fundamental attribution error Actor-observer bias Self-serving bias False Consensus effect False Uniqueness effect
Fundamental attribution error
Jones and Harris- bias towards dispositional attitudes
assess feelings
Bias towards dispositional attributions
Jones and Harris- students asked to write pro/anti castro speech - participants had to ASSESS FEELINGS… Even when told the person had been directed to write pro/anti arguments- people still assumed that the author believed what they were writing.
So therefore bias towards dispositional attributions over situational (correspondent bias)
Actor-observer bias
Actors- situational attributions for own actions (we know about ourselves)
Observers- Dispositional attributions for the people they are observing
2 key explanations: Perceptual focus (different perspectives) Informational differences (we know about our own behaviour)
Self-serving bias- successes!!
We tend to attribute our successes to internal factors and failures to external
Table tennis example
Newspaper accounts of football- after a win- high levels of internal attributions
Why?
Synder found this bias was Ego serving (self enhancing)
Anticipatory attributions (self-handicapping)
Illusion of control- belief in a just world
False consensus effect- students asked i they would walk around campus wearing a sandwich board for 30 minutes.
Ross
We are poor at determining consensus information- people tend to overestimate the extent to which their actions and beliefs are normal and typical.
Ross- sandwich board study- those who agreed 62% though others would also agree
Disagree- 67% would also disagree
People have a tendency to judge how others make decision based on how they make their own- when in fact they don’t
ANOTHER EFFECT THAT IS SEPARATE- False uniqueness effect- we tend to overestimate the uniqueness of our positive characteristics
Weiders model of attributions- sport bias
Iso-ahola
Iso-ahola- found that amongst winners effort was seen as an internal factor but amongst losers as an external factor
Table tennis players- winners make more internal, stable and controllable attributions
Newspaper accounts of footbal- though not as high after a win- internal attributions were always above 50%
Internal attributions were 81% following wins and 58% following losses (Watkins)
IMPORTANT- When result is expected people tend to make more internal attributions- when unexpected they tend to make more external attributions
Attributions and prejudice- Linguistic Intergroup Bias
Concrete- easy to brush off as exceptions
Abstract- vague, harder to prove wrong
positive ingroup descriptions and negative outgroup descriptions are abstract and vague, while negative ingroup descriptions and positive outgroup descriptions are specific and observable. Abstract statements are vague and harder to prove wrong, while, concrete statements are specific, and easy to brush off as exceptions to the rule, therefore keeping stereotypes intact (Whitley & Kite, 2010)
Dispositional inference- abstract= High stability
Concrete= Low likelihood of repetition
DP’s critique of attribution theory
Experimental studies assume what participants say as reflective of their internal states.
They argue that we use attributions in talk to ‘do’ something- to blame someone or deny responsibility
