SCLOA - discuss 2 attribution errors Flashcards
1
Q
fundamental attribution error
A
- coined by Ross (1977)
- refers to the biased tendency to explain other people’s behaviour as due to stable dispositional factors
- rather than situational factors
- the more serious the consequences of the behaviour, the more likely we are to attribute it to disposition
Main studies:
- Ross et al. (1977)
- Jones and Harris (1967)
2
Q
why does FAE occur?
A
- humans are social animals
- so they’re more likely to focus on other beings rather than the environment
- assuming that behaviour is caused by personality gives the impression that people are predictable – and we derive comfort from this
- with regard to semantics, the words used makes it easier to focus on people rather than situations
- when talking of ‘aggression’, one assumes it refers to behaviour or a person rather than a situation
- this assumption is an example of linguistic FAE
3
Q
Ross et al. (1977) - Process
A
- set up a mock quiz
- randomly assigned college students to be either ‘questioners’ (i.e. create questions based on their own knowledge of a subject) or ‘answerers’
- asked everyone taking part to rate the 2 groups
- control: a group of observers were also asked to rate the groups
4
Q
Ross et al. (1977) - Findings and Conclusion
A
- ‘questioners’ were typically rated as having better general knowledge than ‘answerers’
- by both the answerers and observers
- despite not actually answering any questions themselves
- observers paid no attention to the fact that it was a mock quiz
- instead chose to assume that the behaviour reflected a dispositional factor (that questioners had more general knowledge)
5
Q
Ross et al. (1977) - Evaluation
A
- sophisticated methodology
- questioners could make up their own questions; this was known by all participants
- sampling bias: all participants were university students
- low ecological validity
6
Q
Jones and Harris (1967) - Process
A
- participants read essays about Fidel Castro’s rule in Cuba by fellow students
- essays took a stance (supportive/critical) on Fidel Castro
- participants were asked what they thought the writers really felt about Castro
2 conditions:
- choice: participants were told essay writers could choose their own stance
- no choice: participants were told essay writers were assigned a stance
7
Q
Jones and Harris (1967) - Findings and Conclusion
A
- participants in both conditions assumed the essays reflected the real opinions of their writers
- despite a potential explanation (no choice condition), participants still opted for an internal cause over an external one
8
Q
Jones and Harris (1967) - Evaluation
A
- clear IV and DV, shows determinism
- sampling bias: participants were all university students
9
Q
how FAE occurs
A
Gilbert and Malone (1995):
two-step attribution process
- step 1: unconscious processing, assumed to be dispositional causes
- step 2: more controlled and conscious processing, considering situational factors
- according to Gilbert and Maline (1995) we usually don’t proceed to step 2
e. g. if we’re not preoccupied/mentally lazy = enough cognitive resources to proceed
e. g. if we believe that dispositional is the right explanation
10
Q
cultural considerations of FAE
A
collectivist cultures:
- emphasizes an individual’s social relationships (e.g. family, social status)
- hence, less FAE
individualistic cultures:
- emphasizes the individual as the primary cause of action (i.e. you are the cause of your success or failure)
- hence, more FAE
Main study: Norenzayan et al. (2002)
11
Q
Norenzayan et al. (2002)
A
gave 2 types of info to Korean and American participants:
- dispositional only: both made dispositional attributions
- situational + dispositional: Koreans took both into account while Americans focused on dispositional
- this indicates how attribution styles may differ between cultures
12
Q
strengths of FAE
A
- lots of empirical evidence
- helped us understand common errors we make when attempting to explain surrounding events
13
Q
weaknesses of FAE
A
- culture-specific: too much focus on individualism
- most of the empirical evidence comes from laboratory experiments (low ecological validity)
- sample bias: most FAE studies are made up of student participants
14
Q
self-serving bias
A
- coined by Ross (1977)
- tendency people have to explain their own successful behaviour as due to disposition
- and tendency to explain less successful behaviour as due to situational factors
Main study: Johnson et al. (1964)
15
Q
why does SSB occur?
A
- to maintain self-esteem
- so as not to succumb to depression
- Abramson et al. (1989): depressed people often attribute success to external events, and failure to internal causes
- thus the fact that depressed people don’t have SSB contributes to their depression
- People typically expect to succeed and correlate success with their own effort to exaggerate the amount of control they have
16
Q
Johnson et al. (1964) - Process
A
- participants taught children simple math problems
- the children were taught in a very simple way to isolate the variable of ‘teaching Maths’
- children then took a test
- test sheets were altered to either show high score or low score
17
Q
Johnson et al. (1964) - Findings and Conclusion
A
- when participants saw high scores, they explained it as showing their abilities as teachers
- but when participants saw low scores, they explained it as showing the pupil’s lack of ability
- but this effect has not always been found with experienced teachers
- experienced teachers tend to be more confident and more able to criticize themselves
- thus they were less likely to try to protect their self-esteem
18
Q
Johnson et al. (1964) - Evaluation
A
Strengths
- laboratory experiment: strict control over variables
- clear IV and DV to establish clear determinism
Limitations
- laboratory experiment: lacks ecological validity, artificial environment
- sample bias: participants all psych students
19
Q
cultural considerations in SSB
A
- cultures appear to influence attribution styles
- SSB is arguably closer linked to individualistic societies
Main study: Kashima and Triandis (1986)
20
Q
Kashima and Triandis (1986) - Overview
A
- showed unfamiliar slides to American and Japanese students and asked them to memorize the details
- students were asked to evaluate their performance
- Americans were more likely to attribute success to dispositional, and failure to situational
- Japanese tended to explain failure with dispositional
- Japanese exhibited a ‘modesty bias’ – a cultural variation of the SSB
21
Q
strengths of SSB
A
- explains why people (mostly individualistic) tend to explain successes as dispositional and failures as situational
- empirical support
22
Q
weaknesses of SSB
A
- culturally biased to individualistic
- cannot explain the modesty bias present in certain cultures
23
Q
comparing FAE to SSB
A
differs in:
- theoretical explanations of those errors
- the strengths and weakness
similar:
- approaches of research supporting these theoretical claims (both lab)
- role of culture in each attribution error (individualist = more bias)
- both errors in attribution: they propose flaws in attribution theory and how people explain behaviour
