WEEK 5 - Attribution Theories Flashcards
Overview
Attribution theories:
Definitions and basic principles.
Three theories of attribution:
Heider (1958). ‘Naive psychologist’ model
Jones & Davis (1965). Correspondent inference theory.
Kelley (1967, 1973). Covariation model.
Definition
• Attribution is the process of assigning a cause to our behaviour and the behaviour of others (Hogg & Vaughan)
• Attribution is fundamentally concerned with how people infer causal relationships and the characteristics of other people in the environment (Fiske & Taylor, 2008)
• People construct explanations about different phenomena, and usually look for a cause for the result.
o Make sense of people and situations, predict what is likely to happen, have a sense of order about our social world, Participate successfully in social life.
Heider’s theory of the ‘naïve Psychologist’
• The assumption is that if we can explain a phenomenon, we can also predict it
• We all look for explanations about the social phenomena, so we use our intuition in the same way a psychologist does
o We think behaviour is motivated, not random
o We look for enduring properties in objects and behaviour, so we can establish relationships between causes and effects
o We distinguish between personal causes (internal) and environmental causes (external).
Heider – common sense theories of behaviour
- 2 reasons to investigate this behaviour: actions may be guided by attributions and common-sense theories
- Common sense theories of behaviour may be at least partially correct, providing a starting point for scientific theory of development
Heider & Simmel – Naive psychologist model
- Common sense theories are based on 2 factors – the person and the situation (internal and external)
correspondent inference theory – Jones and David
Goal of attribution processes is to infer that observed behaviour corresponds to some underlying quality in the person
The behaviour observed is caused by (or corresponds) to a particular trait of the person.
Inference about a Behaviour
In order to establish if a behaviour can be attributed to someone, we look for five cues: freedom chosen action, non-common effects, not socially desireable, hedonic relevance (important to me), personalism (behaviour was directed to me).
Internal versus External attributions
o If we can’t see an obvious external cause, we tend to infer an internal / dispositional cause
o We prefer to assume internal causes over external ones perhaps because they infer greater stability (and therefore predictability in the future)
• Jones & Davis (1965) Critical Evaluation
o Research identified three main limitations in this theory:
Some dispositions are inferred from unintentional behaviours (e.g., clumsiness). This theory can only be used on intentional behaviours.
Expectancy confirming behaviour can also be used to infer dispositions (e.g., stereotypes).
Inferring dispositions is not the same as inferring causes.
Kellie’s co variation model of Attribution
What information do we use to attribute behaviour? – we use all available information and look for systematic relationships between events, behaving like scientists.
• Covariation principle
o Effect is attributed to condition that is present when the effect is present and absent when effect is absent.
3 classes of information to reach a decision:
Distinctive = the reaction of the person occurs with specific stimuli or with all stimuli
Consistent = info related to what extent a behaviour always occurs when a stimuli is present
Consensual = the reaction of other people is like the reaction of the person.
Limitations of Kelley’s model
o Correlation doesn’t imply causation
o Model describes and ideal situation where all necessary info is available
o We need more than one observation in order to use covariance
o It assumes that we have the cognitive capacity and motivation to use all this info.
o What about schemas and heuristics? – they’re designed to limit cognitive effort
Kellys configuration model
o If we only have one observation, we do not have the cognitive resources or, in general, ‘incomplete data’, we use ‘causal schemas’.
o We use previous information, experience, beliefs and preconceptions in order to interpret the situation or action, integrating it to the schema.
o Multiple Sufficient Cause (MSC). We use mostly two principles: the discount principle (inhibitory causes) and the augmentation principle (facilitating causes).
Halo effect
o Positive assessment about a person is based on a limited amount of information. It extends to areas that are unrelated to the information we have.
o We tend to attribute positive characteristics to attractive people even if the absence of evidence
o Also horns effect – opposite, attribute negative characteristics to unattractive people.
Self-handicapping
o People create excuses that could explain poor performance of the person
o Before task is performed
o Based on external attribution (going to happen and going to be bad). In extreme form people create obstacles that impair good performance.
Learned helplessness
o Seligman – learn to expect bad things and do nothing about it.
o Conversation research used animals – under some conditions we accept negative outcomes without challenging them.
o He places dogs in cages in which they heard a sound and received electric shocks. - Dog learned he could avoid shocks by jumping up and down. After those shocks where received on both sides and the dog learned helplessness so stopped moving
Actions performed don’t match desired outcome – helplessness is learned.
These models have been applied to humans with depression.