WEEK 5 - Attribution Theories

Question 1

Overview

Answer 1

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.

Question 2

Definition

Answer 2

• 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.

Question 3

Heider’s theory of the ‘naïve Psychologist’

Answer 3

• 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).

Question 4

Heider – common sense theories of behaviour

Answer 4

• 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

Question 5

Heider & Simmel – Naive psychologist model

Answer 5

• Common sense theories are based on 2 factors – the person and the situation (internal and external)

Question 6

correspondent inference theory – Jones and David

Answer 6

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).

Question 7

Internal versus External attributions

Answer 7

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)

Question 8

• Jones & Davis (1965) Critical Evaluation

Answer 8

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.

Question 9

Kellie’s co variation model of Attribution

Answer 9

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.

Question 10

3 classes of information to reach a decision:

Answer 10

 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.

Question 11

Limitations of Kelley’s model

Answer 11

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

Question 12

Kellys configuration model

Answer 12

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).

Question 13

Halo effect

Answer 13

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.

Question 14

Self-handicapping

Answer 14

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.

Question 15

Learned helplessness

Answer 15

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.

Question 16

Success and failure in schools

Answer 16

o Wilson & Linville (1982) Identified students who felt their 1st year performance had been a failure.
o Shown video tapes of older students discussing college experiences.
o For half of the participants, older students reported that grading got more lenient as students progressed.
 i.e. an unstable, external causal explanation for failure
o Compared to control group, these students later received better grades and were less likely to drop out
o Fishman and Husman (2017) proposed a way in which attributions affect well-being and performance in students

Question 17

Belief in a just world

Answer 17

o We tend to belief that the world is a good and just place where good things happened to good people and bad things happened to bad people.
o Increases the level of control we have in the world. All I have to do is ‘being good’, ‘I am a nice, good person, therefore I’ll be fine’.
o It helps to justify negative outcomes for others. We tend to think that those who are not doing very well, deserve it. In a similar way, those who are not good at something (or lack something, such as a good job), should be rewarded in a different manner
o The result is that we don’t offer support to change the situation

Question 18

Attributions in dyads

Answer 18

o Assumption that attributional processes mediate between relationship satisfaction and responses that partners have to each other’s behaviour.
o Comparison between couples defined as ‘distressed’ (self-report and / or contact with therapists) and ‘non-distressed’ couples.
o In ‘distressed’ couples, attributions accentuate the impact of negative partner behaviour and minimise impact of positive partner’s behaviour.
o Internal, stable, global (influential in other areas of relationship) attributions for negative behaviour (she was late because she doesn’t care for me).
o Minimise impact of positive behaviour (he only bought me flowers because he wanted sex).

Question 19

Attributions in sexual harassment

Answer 19

o Sexual harassment is hard to define and not everyone agrees on its ‘boundaries’
o What constitutes sexual harassment in one case, may not be considered in a different case
o Some particular individual aspects predict whether someone believes an action is sexual harassment
o We tend to look for ‘typical’ (consensual) information in order to consider something as SH
o We can also attribute ‘blame’ to the victim

Question 20

Can we control our attributions?

Answer 20

● Attributions clearly have important consequences on our interactions and lives
● Fishman (2014) suggests that we can influence our attributions
● He proposed the perceived control of the attribution process (PCAP)
● He suggested 2 main processes
– Perceived Control of Attributions (PCA) which refers to an internal locus of control over determining the cause of outcomes
– Awareness of the motivational consequences of attributions (AMC) refers to an understanding that attributions have psychological and behavioural consequences
● This concept is similar to the idea of Locus of control (Rotter,1964)

Question 21

PCA

Answer 21

● People who feel capable to think about an event in another way, or to reappraise the situation, are more likely to do it
● Those who believe that they can determine the cause of an event and how it affects them are more likely to alter their causal reasoning about the event
● Although attribution can be highly automatic, people are still capable of driving the process

Question 22

AMC

Answer 22

● Individuals endorsing the AMC perspective are more likely to understand the consequences of an event and to influence how they behave in response to the event
● Those who do not understand its consequences will more likely dwell on the event itself and prolong the negative consequences following the event

Question 23

PCPA Model

Answer 23

● PCAP allows individuals to adaptively disengage from the attribution process
● People believe in their ability to influence the process because they are aware of its consequences
● PCA and AMC promote a sense of autonomy
● This theory relates to other well-established processes and theories (e.g., self-determination theory, self-efficacy theory, emotion regulation theory…)

Question 24

Fundamental Attribution Error

Answer 24

o “Tendency for attributers to underestimate the impact of situational factors, and to overestimate the role of dispositional factors in controlling behaviour” (Ross, 1977 p.183).
o Tendency to explain others’ actions as stemming from dispositions even in the presence of clear situational causes.
o We overestimate the impact of situational factors
 Examples: Tendency to attribute poverty to the person rather than their social conditions / Overweight is attributed to the person, even in cases in which a medical condition is present / Over-attribution of accidents to the driver rather than the vehicle and the conditions of the road (Barjonet, 1980).

Question 25

FAE in groups

Answer 25

o Although attributions are a cognitive process, research has been applied to investigate intergroup relations
o Individuals make attributions of themselves and others in terms of group memberships, usually ingroup (my group) and outgroups (the other groups)
o Ultimate attribution error: Pettigrew (1979) extended the fundament attribution error to groups
o Positive ingroup and negative outgroup attributions are dispositional, while negative ingroup and positive outgroup attributions are situational
o “They are bad (and therefore we are good)”
o “We had a bad day” (They are always bad)”

Question 26

Attributions in societies

Answer 26

o Attributions are involved in stereotypes, as they are useful in explaining the way groups work. E.g., Organised Germans, The English are always on time…, Italians are not very organised
o Usually, attributions about group members can be used to justify inequalities between groups
o Poverty is explained as ‘lack of ability’. Obesity is explained as ‘lack of effort’
o We can use the UAE to explain some COVID-19 explanations…