Chapter 5: Social Attribution - Explaining Behavior

Attributions and Controllability

Failure that implies controllability (lack of effort/poor strategy) makes it easier to persevere since we can adjust our effort/strategy Failure that implies that things our out of our control (I'm not smart) makes it easier to simply give up

Cognitive Load

Gilbert argues that we rapidly/automatically characterize person as having disposition corresponding to behavior and only later do we consider the situation and adjust our initial internal attribution. HOWEVER, if we are cognitively busy (tired, unmotivated, distracted...) more likely to commit fundamental attribution because adjustment that occurs when considering situational context is skipped. EX: Women discussing sex and vacation anxiety study Group that was cognitively busy while watching video ranked women as being anxious overall - failed to adjust initial impression and take into account the situation/the topic she was discussing

Counterfactual Thinking

Considerations of what might have, could have, or should have happened if only a few minor things were done differently.

Fundamental Attribution Error Experiment - Advantages and Disadvantages (Jeopardy - Questioner/Contestants)

Demonstrates that people assign too much weight to individual for success and mistakes and fail to appreciate the situational factors Questioners ask contestants difficult questions that they know the answers to so questioners have huge advantage while contestants at a huge disadvantage. When asked about knowledge of questioner, contestants ranked knowledge of questioner above their own and observers also rated knowledge of questioner about contestant. These two groups failed to appreciate the advantages of the situation (that the questioner had the answers) and attributed their behavior to internal qualities (knowledge) than the situation. However questioner rated their knowledge roughly equal to that of the other groups - situational attribution. This means that when it comes to oneself, one is able to appreciate the advantages/disadvantages of the situation.

When explaining intention behind behavior falls into two categories: _______________ and _____________

Desires; Beliefs

Fundamental Attribution Error Experiment (Questioner/Responder)

Experiment in which questioner asks responder question and tells the responder which of two answers to give (either altruistic or selfish response). Questioner then asked to rate personality traits of responder and questioner drew inferences about responder based on they answers they instructed them to give! Altruistic responses rated more favorably than selfish ones Even though questioner caused that person's behavior by instructing them on what to say still made internal attributions about person

What are the three types of covariation information?

1.) Consensus - Whether most people would behave the same way or differently in a given situation 2.) Distinctiveness - Whether a behavior is unique to a specific situation or occurs in many/all situations 3.) Consistency - Whether an individual behaves the same way or differently in the given situation on different occasions (if behavior is not consistent across occasions then hard to make attribution to person or situation)

Causes of Fundamental Attribution Error

1.) Just World Hypothesis 2.) Perceptual Salience 3.) Cognitive Load

Explanatory Style

A person's habitual way of explaining events that is assessed among the following three dimensions: 1.) Internal/External - Is cause due to something about you or circumstances? 2.) Stable/Unstable - Will cause present again or is it just one time? 3.) Global/Specific - Is cause something influences other areas of life or just one?

Actor-Observer Difference

Actors more likely to make situational attributions for a particular situation about themselves than observers. Observer's more likely to attribute very same behavior to the actor's disposition Causes: 1.) Assumptions about what info needs explaining vary for actors and observers (for actor their taken as given so doesn't need to be explained but for observer nature of a person not a given so needs explaining) 2.) Perceptual Salience- actors attribute behavior to situation because it stands out and observers attribute behavior to person because person stands out 3.) Actors/Observers have different info available to them - actor more likely to know if action is distinctive for them or not than observer

Are Dispositions Fixed or Flexible?

Although personality dimensions play a big role in judging people's personalities in both western and asian cultures, asian cultures more likely to believe that personality more flexible/changeable than americans. EX: Why asians often outperform americans academically - believe abilities/personality can be changed by environmental factors

Emotional Amplification

An emotional reaction tends to be more intense if the event almost didn't happen (EX: Would you feel worse if loved one died in plane crash after switching flight last minute or sticking with original flight?)

Just World Hypothesis

Belief that people get what they deserve in life and deserve what they get One reason for the fundamental attribution error; When unsettling events happen in life tempted to think that it couldn't happen to us - minimize threat of such events by attributing them to someone's disposition instead of fate/chance. In other words "what goes around comes around" "they got what they deserve" Attribute to disposition because there's a motive to do so to comfort us EX: rape/domestic abuse victims seen as responsible for their fate

Internal (dispositional) attribution

Attribution due to product of something within person (personality, disposition, personality); personal - tells us a lot about person

External (situational) Attribution

Attribution due to something about the context/circumstances of a given situation; impersonal - doesn't say much about person

Perceptual Salience

How much the cause stands out/how salient it is. Features that capture our attention are more likely to be seen as causes of an effect - because people are so noticeable/interesting/salient in our individualistic culture they stand out more than the surrounding environment. In other words, people stand out and situations seen as background so more likely to attribute something internally than externally.

Discounting Principle***

If situational factors/constraints could have created observed behavior then discount person's disposition (EX: In a job interview someone seems quite personable. Is this because he has a sunny disposition or because his desire to land the job makes him act personable? Because we know most people would act personable in a job interview, we discount his personable demeanor as telling us something about his disposition.)

Augmentation Principle

If strong forces present that would typically inhibit behavior, but behavior occurs anyway, assume that actor's dispositions were powerful (EX: Person advocates for certain belief even though if doing so would result in him being shot - means that the person truly believes in the cause)

The observer is inclined to attribute actions to ________________ of the actor but the actor is inclined to attribute actions to ______________________

Internal property/qualities; Situational Factors

Social Class and Attribution `

People with lower socioeconomic status more likely to make situational attributions (like interdependent cultures) and people with higher economic status more likely to make dispositional attributions (like independent cultures)

Gender and Attributional Style

Research shows boys are more likely to attribute failure to lack of effort and girls are more likely to attribute failure to lack of ability Due to teacher's feedback patterns/evaluations - Negative evaluation of girls directed at intellectual inadequacy while negative evaluation of boys directed at non intellectual factors Result - girls come to learn criticism means they lack intellectual ability whereas boys learn criticism means the simply haven't worked hard enough

Pessimistic Explanatory Style

Tendency to explain failure/negative events in terms of internal, stable, and global attributions (People with this explanatory style show correlation with getting lower grades)

Causal Attribution

The construal process people use to explain both their own and other people's behavior Linking an event to a cause, such as inferring that someone's personality is responsible for their behavior

Why are people prone to a self-serving bias?

Self-serving bias makes people feel good about themselves and protects/maintains self-esteem (motivation to protect self-esteem)

When consensus, distinctiveness, and consistency are all high then attribution is _______________ but when consistency is high but consensus and distinctiveness are low then attribution is __________________

Situational; Dispositional Logic of covariation has held true in reach studies EXCEPT for fact that people are only modestly influenced by consensus information and focus more on information about the person (consistency and distinctiveness)

Olympic Medalist and CounterFactual Thinking

Study which shows silver medalists not as happy as bronze medalists even though silver is better than bronze because silver medalist focuses on fact that almost made it to the gold while bronze medalist is simply happy to have placed/gotten a medal

Self-Serving Attributional Bias

Tendency to attribute failure and other bad events to external circumstances but to attribute success and other good events to internal qualities/themselves In other words people attribute success internally and failure externally (EX: If student does well on test makes internal attribution, "I'm smart" but if student fails test makes external attribution "test questions worded weirdly") Research examining professional athletes shows in victories attributions to their own team more common than in defeat and vice versa

Fundamental Attribution Error

Tendency to attribute people's behavior to personality/internal factors even when powerful situational factors are at hand Overlook situational factors and overemphasize importance of disposition on behavior

Optimistic Explanatory Style

Tendency to explain failure/negative events in terms of external, unstable, and specific attributions (People with this explanatory style show correlation with better health since this style makes us less prone to despair and encourages outlook that encourages regular exercise/doctor visits - Harvard Longitudinal Study with class of 1942 and 44)

Covariation Principle

The idea that behavior should be attributed to potential causes that occur along with the observed behavior In other words a principle of attribution theory that holds that people attribute behavior to factors that are present when a behavior occurs and are absent when it does not occur

Attribution Theory

The study how of people understand the causes of events A set of concepts explaining how people assign causes to the events around them and the effects of these causal assessments

What determines whether counterfactual event seems like it almost didn't happen?

Time and Distance (ie. seems more tragic is someone dies quarter mile from safety than 75 miles from safety because it almost didn't happen) Routine vs. norm (ie. man should be compensated more if dies at robbery that occurs at grocery store where he never shops than if it occurs at one where he always shops because departure from norm/almost didn't go to that grocery store)

True or False: Causal attribution has a tremendous impact on our thoughts, feelings, and future behavior. It can help us grasp what has happened an anticipate what will happen next

True

True or False: People believe compensation should be greater if person dies and event almost didn't happen (ie. almost didn't die or died because departed from norm)

True

True or False: When person offers excuse for problematic behavior it yields more sympathy when it is beyond the person's control than if it is controllable

True

True or False: Although the Fundamental Attribution error is widespread and occurs across cultures, there is evidence that it is MORE widespread and pronounced for Westerners than Easterners

True - In essay study where participant assigned essay position both asians and americans thought person actually held those beliefs but after being asked themselves to do that task and take on a position asians more likely to appreciate situation and not attribute to disposition than americans - Asians more likely to acknowledge consensus and infer if most people acting that way in a situation probably due to situational factor - Asians less likely to make that initial dispositional inference than Americans in the first place.

True or False: People can be trained to adopt more productive attributional tendencies for academic outcomes (attributing to failure to lack of effort) which can improve academic success

True - making people believe they have control over events that they used to think were out of their control unleashes productivity and makes future success more likely

Cultural Differences in Attribution

Westerners/Independent cultures more likely to attribute behavior to disposition where as Asians/Interdependent cultures more likely to attribute behavior to the situation. This is because in independent cultures (western) people think of themselves more in the context of personal goals whereas interdependent cultures (non-western) think of themselves more in terms of their social roles and thus pay more attention to the situation.

Priming Culture

When people from two cultures (american and asian) primed to think about one culture or another make attributions consistent with culture that is primed (EX: If see capitol make dispositional attributions but if see dragon make situational attributions)