Discussion
Any.esp96
Chapter3-SocialBeliefsandJudgmentsPart2-Attribution.pptxChapter 3
Social Beliefs & Judgments
Part 2 (Attribution)
1
Part Two
Attribution
2
Attribution: Understanding Others
Attribution is our effort to understand the causes behind others’ behavior and, on occasion, the causes behind our own behavior
Think about the strange case of Thomas Junta: a hockey dad convicted of beating a referee to death during a pee-wee little league hockey game.
Imagine you were an attorney in this case. When talking to the jury and trying to explain Junta’s behavior, what would you tell the jurors? Why did Junta do it?
3
Attribution: Understanding Others
Attribution is our effort to understand the causes behind others’ behavior and, on occasion, the causes behind our own behavior
Think about the strange case of Thomas Junta: a hockey dad convicted of beating a referee to death during a pee-wee little league hockey game.
Imagine you were an attorney in this case. When talking to the jury and trying to explain Junta’s behavior, what would you tell the jurors? Why did Junta do it?
Of course, you are probably wondering which attorney you are: a prosecutor or a defense attorney. That makes a difference …
4
Attribution: Understanding Others
Attribution and Junta
From a prosecutor’s point of view, Junta was a violent man with a long history of violence. Thus Junta had an internal, personality-oriented violent response. He is a violent person!
From the defense attorney’s point of view, there was legal provocation. The case was self-defense oriented, and thus based on external factors (the referee helped create the situation that led to the beating)
5
Theories of Attribution
Humans often use others’ behavior as a guide to understanding that person. In the next few slides, we will cover several theories of attribution, including …
1). Jones’ Correspondent Inference Theory
2). Kelley’s Theory of Causal Attributions
3). The Fundamental Attribution Error
This is also called the Correspondence Bias
4). Additional elements of attribution
5). The Actor/Observer Effect
6
Correspondent Inference Theory
1). Jones’ Correspondent Inference Theory posits that we use others’ behavior as a basis for inferring their stable traits
During this attribution process, we often fail to acknowledge the situation that brought about a behavior. In other words …
Sam spilled red wine on the carpet because he is a clumsy person (internal cause), not because he was momentarily distracted (external cause)
Wanda spanked her child because she’s a terrible mother (internal cause), not because the child ran out in front of a car and she was scared (external cause)
7
Correspondent Inference Theory
1). Correspondent Inference Theory – Informative information
When trying to figure out why someone behaved the way they did, we focus on information that seems most informative
A. Was the behavior freely chosen
Jones had participants write essays favoring Castro’s Cuban regime. When the student chose to write a pro-Castro essay, those reading the essay thought that the writer actually had a pro-Castro opinion
This is pretty good reasoning, right? Why else would he choose to write a pro-Castro essay if he didn’t hold a pro-Castro opinion? (We’ll return to this study later!)
8
Correspondent Inference Theory
1). Correspondent Inference Theory – Informative information
When trying to figure out why someone behaved the way they did, we focus on information that seems most informative
B. We also focus on non-common effects, or effects that are caused by only one specific factor, not others
Think about John, who loves his job, gets great pay, and lives two blocks away. Why does he work there?
There are lots of good reasons to work there, and no single one gives you an answer as to his behavior
9
Correspondent Inference Theory
1). Correspondent Inference Theory – Informative information
When trying to figure out why someone behaved the way they did, we focus on information that seems most informative
B. We also focus on non-common effects, or effects that are caused by only one specific factor, not others
Think about Anthony, who hates his job, gets lousy pay, and lives two blocks away. Why does he work there?
Easy answer now: Location! Location! Location!
He works two blocks away!
10
Correspondent Inference Theory
1). Correspondent Inference Theory – Informative information
When trying to figure out why someone behaved the way they did, we focus on information that seems most informative
C. We pay close attention to social desirability issues, often thinking that we know more about another person when his actions are counter to the culture at large
What impression would you form if you saw a student on campus wearing a t-shirt and jeans?
You’d probably just think he was an ordinary student
11
Correspondent Inference Theory
1). Correspondent Inference Theory – Informative information
When trying to figure out why someone behaved the way they did, we focus on information that seems most informative
C. We pay close attention to social desirability issues, often thinking that we know more about another person when his actions are counter to the culture at large
What if the student wore a tuxedo on campus?
You might think he came from a wedding or a job interview. His “behavior” in wearing non-student clothes makes you think you know more about him
12
Kelly’s Theory of Attribution
2). Kelley’s Theory of Causal Attributions
Like Jones, Kelly thought that people often question another person’s behaviors, trying to figure it out …
Why did he break a date?
Why didn’t she like my research paper?
Why did my mother yell at me?
Why is the police officer pulling me over?
Kelly thought we rely heavily on the principles of consistency, distinctiveness, and consensus to explain another’s behavior
13
Kelly’s Theory of Attribution
2). Kelley’s Theory of Causal Attributions
Does he always break dates? (consistency)
If yes, his behavior probably has something to do with him
Does he just break dates with me, or does he break them with everyone? (distinctiveness)
If just you, maybe it is you! If it’s all girls, then it must be him
Do all of my potential suitors break dates? (consensus)
If they all stand you up, then maybe it is you!
14
Kelly’s Theory of Attribution
2). Kelley’s Theory of Causal Attributions
When an action is consistent, but lacks distinctiveness and consensus, we tend to attribute it to the actor’s traits.
It is something about him
For now, let’s look at a third attribution model that focusing on the Correspondence Bias (though I will use the term more people are familiar with, the Fundamental Attribution Error) …
15
The Fundamental Attribution Error
3). Fundamental Attribution Error
Why do you think these two people are fighting?
Do you think they are simply “angry people”
16
The Fundamental Attribution Error
3). Fundamental Attribution Error
The “Fundamental Attribution Error” involves the tendency to explain others’ actions as stemming from their dispositions (or internal traits), even in the presence of clear situational causes
Think about one of the original studies in this area by Ross looking at a “Quiz Show”
17
The Quiz Show
3). Fundamental Attribution Error
Ross, Amabile, and Steinmetz – The Quiz Show
Study examined participants’ attributions about a quiz show
Three participants were randomly assigned to one of three roles in the study: Host, Contestant, or Viewer
18
The Quiz Show
3). Fundamental Attribution Error
Ross, Amabile, and Steinmetz – The Quiz Show
Study examined participants’ attributions about a quiz show
The Host made up difficult questions (but they had to know the correct answer). The host then quizzed the Contestant. Viewers later watched the show.
19
The Quiz Show
3). Fundamental Attribution Error
Ross, Amabile, and Steinmetz – The Quiz Show
Results:
Predictably, Contestants got most questions wrong
When Viewers later rated both the Contestant and the Host, they rated the Host as more knowledgeable than the Contestant
But these roles were based on random assignment, so the chances that the Host is actually smarter than the Contestant is not all that likely! Think about this …
20
The Quiz Show
3). Fundamental Attribution Error
Ross, Amabile, and Steinmetz – The Quiz Show
People often fail to consider the situation
Here, the Host was allowed to develop the questions, so he obviously knew the answers!
See supplemental materials for more on this study
But does that really make the Host smarter? This is an example of…
21
The Fundamental Attribution Error
3). Fundamental Attribution Error
People give the situation insufficient weight
We assume actions begin with the individual’s temperament
We focus on the individual, not the things going on around her
Remember the study we talked about earlier by Jones, the one where students wrote a pro-Castro essay?
22
The Fundamental Attribution Error
3). Fundamental Attribution Error
People give the situation insufficient weight
We assume actions begin with the individual’s temperament
We focus on the individual, not the things going on around her
Remember the study we talked about earlier by Jones, the one where students wrote a pro-Castro essay?
In a follow-up study, Jones found that essay readers thought the essay represented the author’s real opinion even when the essay writer was forced to write a pro-Castro essay
23
The Fundamental Attribution Error
3). Fundamental Attribution Error
Like optical illusions, there’s a figure and a background in person perception. As humans, we often pay attention to the figure, but don’t really focus on the background.
Remember this figure-ground example?
Do you see the two faces or the vase?
Our focus on the person can have a big influence our (mis!)attributions
24
The Fundamental Attribution Error
3). Fundamental Attribution Error in real life
Taylor and Fiske looked at interview seating arrangements …
Participants watched a conversation between Person A and Person B. Sometimes, participants sat so they faced Person A. Other times, they faced Person B
When facing A, participants saw A as the dominant actor in the conversation. When facing B, they saw Person B as the dominant actor
They failed to notice the situation!
25
The Fundamental Attribution Error
3). Fundamental Attribution Error
Although we overestimate the importance of internal causes shaping others’ behavior, we also believe that we correct for this error more than other people do. Do we? Ha!
The impact of the Fundamental Attribution Error
The food-stamp line:
We might think people on food stamps are lazy, but that only focuses on the person, not the situation
After all, we fail to look at the state of the economy!
26
The Fundamental Attribution Error
3). Fundamental Attribution Error
Although we overestimate the importance of internal causes shaping others’ behavior, we also believe that we correct for this error more than other people do. Do we? Ha!
The impact of the Fundamental Attribution Error
Same thing for convicted thieves …
Is he deserving of punishment because he is a “bad” person?
Or are there other reasons for his criminal behaviors?
27
The Fundamental Attribution Error
3). Fundamental Attribution Error and cultural factors
Sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but the “error” is more common in cultures that emphasize individual freedom (individualistic cultures, like ours) than those cultures that emphasize group cohesiveness (collectivistic cultures).
This may depend on age.
Miller found that young children in the USA don’t separate internal from external attributions until the child hits age 11
28
The Fundamental Attribution Error
3). Fundamental Attribution Error and cultural factors
Do Americans focus on personal autonomy? Nisbett thought so
He showed participants a film about fish in an aquarium, with the camera focusing on one “starring” fish
29
The Fundamental Attribution Error
3). Fundamental Attribution Error and cultural factors
Do Americans focus on personal autonomy? Nisbett thought so
He showed participants a film about fish in an aquarium, with the camera focusing on one “starring” fish
Both American and Japanese students could recount a lot of details about the “starring” fish, but only Japanese students knew about the rest of the aquarium scene (the other fish, the corral, the water color, etc.)
30
The Fundamental Attribution Error
3). Fundamental Attribution Error and cultural factors
Bilingual studies on the “I am” sentence completing tasks also support cultural differences in the Fundamental Attribution Error
Bicultural individuals respond differently depending on the salient culture:
They make the error when thinking individualistically
Do not make the error when thinking collectivistically
If you still want more insight into the fundamental attribution error (especially cultural elements), see the supplemental materials
31
Theories of Attribution
4). Additional elements of attribution
A. Stability
We may believe that an outcome was caused by things that will not change over time (like intelligence) or factors that will change over time (the amount of effort we use)
B. Controllability
If we believe the person we are evaluating can change their behavior if he or she wishes to do so, then we assume they caused the event because it was under their control
32
Theories of Attribution
4). Additional elements of attribution
C. Augmenting principles involve the tendency for us to add weight to a factor if the action occurs despite the presence of inhibitory causes
If a person runs a red light with a cop right behind him, we are more likely to conclude he is a reckless driver
33
Theories of Attribution
4). Additional elements of attribution
D. Discounting principles involve the tendency to attach less importance to one potential cause of some behavior if there are other potential causes are present
If a may ran a red light because everyone else ran it too, or because there were no cars coming from the other direction, or because his pregnant wife was about to deliver a baby in the car he may be seen as less reckless
But how do we explain our own behavior? …
34
The Actor-Observer Effect
5). The Actor-Observer Effect
The Actor-Observer Effect is like the Fundamental Attribution Error, but it takes into account attributions for our own behavior
That is, we tend to attribute our own behavior to situational causes but the behavior of others to internal causes
If someone else trips, they are clumsy (via the Fundamental Attribution Error). But how do we explain our own tripping?
It’s obviously due to the uneven ground!
Let’s look at some other examples …
35
The Actor-Observer Effect
5). The Actor-Observer Effect
A. Think about a real life example from Sauliner and Perlman
They found that inmates cited transitory situational causes for their problems (the actor effect)
Prison counselors cited the internal, personal characteristics of the inmates as the reason for the prisoners’ problems (the fundamental attribution error)
36
The Actor-Observer Effect
5). The Actor-Observer Effect
B. Think about another study by Storms
He asked observers to watch a conversation between two actors. He then had the observers and the actors measure how friendly, talkative, and nervous the actors had been
As you might suspect, actors based all of their ratings of the conversation on the situation while observers based their ratings on internal dispositions of the two actors
But later, the actors saw the same conversation from either their prior viewpoint or from the viewpoint of the person they had been talking to
37
The Actor-Observer Effect
5). The Actor-Observer Effect
B. Think about another study by Storms
He asked observers to watch a conversation between two actors. He then had the observers and the actors measure how friendly, talkative, and nervous the actors had been
If they saw the conversation from their own original point of view, they once again saw situational attributions
If they saw the conversation from the other actor’s point of view (that is, now acting as an observer), they rated themselves in the film in dispositional terms
38
The Actor-Observer Effect
5). The Actor-Observer Effect
C. When looking at their successes and failures on college intelligence exams, students blame the poor performances of others on inability, but blame their own poor performance on the exam difficulty.
D. Observers conclude that others will behave similarly (act the same way) in the future, but actors think that they themselves will act differently
39
The Actor-Observer Effect – Why?
5). The Actor-Observer Effect – Why does it occur?
The actor knows how past experiences influenced his current situation, and they know how they formed their attitudes.
Think about Bob (pictured below) trapped under plastic. Do you know how he got trapped? I bet Bob does!
The observers’ attention is focused on the actor. They may be unaware of the situational factors that got the actor to that place
40
Understanding the “Men are from Mars, Women are from Venus” Phenomenon!
5). The Actor-Observer Effect – Why does it occur?
Sam shows up late to pick Susan up for their date.
Sam thinks the problem with his tardiness is due to lots of red lights he encountered on the way (situation-based)
Susan thinks Sam is losing interest in her (internal-based)
If each can change their point of view and acknowledge that the other person is focused on a different attribution, they may be able to solve the problem!
41
So far in this chapter, we have looked at how we make sense of the social world and how we form attributions for both our own behavior and the behavior of others
In our next section (Part 3), we focus on priming mechanisms, looking at how we might be unconsciously affected by events in our social world
Our Next Section
