Attribution

Four principles

(I) consensus, (2) consistency, (3) distinctiveness, and (4) controllability.

attribution theory

Attribution theory explains the process you go through in trying to understand people's behaviors, particularly the reasons or motivations for these behaviors.

Internal

If you judge people's cooperative behavior as internally caused (that is, as motivated by their personality), you're more apt to form a positive evaluation of them and, eventually, to like them. Low consensus, high consistency, low distinctiveness, and high controllability lead to <111 attribution of internal causes. As a result, you praise or blame the person for his or her behaviors.

Attribution Process

In trying to discover the causes of another's behavior, your first step is to determine whether the individual or some outside factor is responsible. That is, you must first determine whether the cause is internal (for example, due to some personality trait) or external (for example, due to some situational factor). Your assessment of someone's behavior as internally or externally motivated will greatly influence your evaluation of that person.

Controllability: Behavior Control

This, by the way, is why excuses involving uncontrollable factors are more effective than those involving controllable factors.

Consensus: Similarity with Others

When you use the principle of consensus, you ask, "Do other people behave in the same way as the person on whom I'm focusing?" That is, is the person acting in accordance with the consensus, the majority? If the answer is no, you're more likely to attribute the behavior to some internal cause and conclude: "This person is different."

self-attribution

in the case of your own behavior-helps you to impose order and logic and to better understand the possible causes of the behaviors you observe.

Distinctiveness: Similarity in Different Situations

When you use the principle of distinctiveness, you ask if this person reacts in similar ways in different situations. If the answer is yes, there is low distinctiveness, and you're likely to conclude that the behavior has an internal cause.

External

In contrast, if you judge that very same behavior to be externally caused (the watchful eye of the boss is forcing someone to behave cooperatively, for example), you're more apt to form a negative evaluation and, eventually, to dislike the person (because he or she isn't "really" cooperative). High consensus, low consistency, high distinctiveness, and low controllability lead to an attribution of external causes.

Examples of external

Lots of others were fired (h1gh consensus) John has never been fired from any other job (low consistency). John has always been successful (high distinctiveness) John was not given any alternatives (low controllability).

Examples of Internal

No one else was fired (low consensus). John has been fired from lots of other jobs (high consistency). John has failed at many other things (low distinctiveness) John could have been retained 1f he had agreed to move to another shop (high controllability).

overattribution

Our efforts to attribute causality face several major barriers. Three such barriers are the self-serving bias, overattribution, and the fundamental attribution error.

Consistency: Similarity over Time

When you use the principle of consistency, you ask if this person repeatedly (consistently) behaves in the same way in similar situations. If the answer is yes, there's high consistency, and you're likely to attribute the behavior to internal motivation.