Attribution 1: Theories

1
Attribution 1 Theories
Dr Elizabeth Sheppard

• C81IND
• Individual in Society

2
Attribution Theory

• Attribution theory - The conceptual framework
  within social psychology dealing with lay, or
  common sense explanations of behaviour.
• Through life we gradually construct
  explanations/theories of why people behave in
  certain ways
• 1.) Naïve psychologist (Heider, 1958)
• 2.) Correspondent inference (Jones Davis, 1965)
  
• 3.) Kelleys model

3
Primary questions

• 1.) What are the main characteristics of
  attributions?
• 2.) How are attributions are made?

4
Naïve Psychologist(Fritz Heider,1958)

• Sets out the foundations of attribution theory
  common sense psychology
• Individual as a Naïve Scientist
• Two important contributions
• 1.) Proposed the idea of internal
• external causes of behaviour
  2.)
  Perceivers ignore part or all situational
• factors when explaining behaviour.
• (Later theorists who expanded on and developed
  Heiders ideas Kelley,1967 Jones Davis,1965
  Weiner, 1979. )

5
Correspondent inference (Jones Davis, 1965)

• When judging anothers behaviour we use
  information to draw a correspondent inference
  where the behaviour is attributed to a
  disposition/personality characteristic
• Use various characteristics to do this including
• Social desirability
• Non-common effects
• Important historically, but its impact has been
  limited

6
Kelleys Model (1967,1973)

• What information is used to arrive at a causal
  attribution?
• Developed a logical model for judging whether a
  particular action should be attributed to some
  characteristic (internal) of the person or the
  environment (external)

7
What information is used to arrive at a causal
attribution?

• 1.) Covariation - Perceiver has info from
  multiple observations, at different times and
  situations, and can perceive the covariation of
  an observed effect and its causes
• 2.) Configuration - Perceiver is faced with a
  single observation and must take account of the
  configuration (i.e.the current info available)

8
Covariation Multiple observations

• Covariation Principle An effect is attributed
  to a condition that is present when the effect is
  present, and absent when the effect is absent.
  (e.g. donuts disappear/ Homer)

• Based on statistical technique ANOVA.
• Examines changes in a dependent variable
• (the effect) by varying independent variables
  
• (the conditions).

9
Analysis of Variance Model of Covariation
Does behaviour generalise?
Possible single causes
Types of info (IVs)
8 Information combinations 2 x 2 x 2
10
Analysis of Variance Model of Covariation
(McArthur e.g., 1972)
Does behaviour generalise?
Possible single causes
Types of info (IVs)
8 Information combinations 2 x 2 x 2
11
Analysis of Variance Model of Covariation
(McArthur e.g., 1972)
Does behaviour generalise?
Possible single causes
Types of info (IVs)
8 Information combinations 2 x 2 x 2
12
Why did the students fall asleep during the
lecture?

• e.g. The majority of the students fell asleep in
  Dr. Sheppards lecture on theories of
  attribution. They also fell asleep during her
  other lectures, but not lectures given by other
  teaching staff.
• High consensus
• High consistency
• High distinctiveness

Boring lecturer?
13
Why did the students fall asleep during the
lecture?

• e.g. The majority of the students fell asleep in
  Dr. Sheppards lecture on theories of
  attribution. They never fell asleep during her
  other lectures, or in lectures given by other
  teaching staff.
• High consensus
• Low consistency
• High distinctiveness

Day after formal ball? Hot lecture theatre?
14
But

• Works well for person and entity
• No single clear pattern which can lead to
  circumstance attributions. These seem to be
  maximised when consistency is low (Forsterling,
  1989 Hewstone Jaspars, 1987)
• This can be seen as a limitation to the model

15
Main criticisms of covariation principle

• 1.) Doesnt work well for circumstance
  attributions
• 2.) Covariation does not mean causality
• 3.) Participants are given pre-packaged info
  which they might not seek or use in everyday
  situations (model idealised/normative)
• 4.) Evidence suggests people are poor at
  assessing covariation between events (Alloy
  Tabachnik, 1984)
• 5.) It may appear that the covariation
  principle was used, but the processing used may
  be completely different (e.g. Nisbett Ross,
  1980)
• 6.) Requires multiple observations over time-
  which is not always possible to do

16
Configuration Single observations

• Causal Schemata Preconceptions or theories
  built up from experience about how certain kinds
  of causes interact to produce a specific effect
  (abstract-content free i.e. general apply
  across content areas)
• Allows one to interpret information quickly by
  comparing and integrating it with a schema
• E.g. multiple sufficient cause schema any of
  several causes can produce the same effect

17
Configuration Single observations

• Each Schema is associated with a number of
  principles set out by Kelley
• Discounting principle if different causes can
  produce the same effect, the role of a given
  cause in producing the effect is discounted if
  other plausible causes are present

e.g. Why is your flatmate doing the washing up?
18
Configuration Single observations

•  Augmentation principle The role of a given
  cause is increased (augmented) if an effect
  occurs in the presence of an inhibitory cause.

e.g. Why did the man in the chicken
costume win the race?
19
Main criticisms of causal schemata (Fiedler,
1982)

• 1.)   The existence and functioning of causal
  schemata has not been successfully demonstrated
  research supporting it is artificial cant
  prove
• 2.)   The idea of schemata is content free and
  thus too abstract

20
Can internal and external attributions be
distinguished?

• Statements implying internal attributions can be
  rephrased to imply external vice versa
• Students asked to write down why they had chosen
  their degree subject at uni (Nisbett et al, 1973)
• Statements such as I want to make a lot of
  money were coded as internal while statements
  such as Chemistry is a high paying field were
  external
• Criticised internal/external categories for being
  very broad and too heterogeneous (Lalljee,1981)
• Participants have difficulty understanding the
  distinction (Taylor Koivumaki, 1976)

21
Can internal and external attributions be
distinguished?

• Other categorisations of attributions e.g.
  multidimensional approach (Weiner, 1986)
• Locus internal or external?
• Stability is the cause a stable or unstable one
  (over time)
• Controllability to what extent is future task
  performance under the actors control?

22
Applications of attribution theory

• Individual differences attributional style
• Rotter (1966) argues people differ in terms of
  the amount of control they believe they have over
  reinforcements punishments received measures
  of locus of control related to range of behaviour
  e.g. political beliefs, achievement
• Internals high personal control over destiny
• Externals fatalistic, things occur by chance
• Attributional style questionnaire (Peterson et
  al., 1982) sorts explanations on 3 dimensions
  internal/external, stable/unstable,
  global/specific
• Those who view aversive events as caused by
  internal, stable, global factors depressive
  attributional style

23
Applications of attribution theory

• Interpersonal relationships
• Most commonly used in relation to marital success
  e.g. Fincham OLeary, 1983
• happily married individuals tend to credit
  partners for positive behaviour by citing
  internal, stable, global controllable factors
  to explain them
• Negative behaviour is explained away by ascribing
  to external, unstable, specific uncontrollable
  causes
• Distressed couples do the opposite
• Women continuous engage in attributional thought
  about relationships men only do so when
  dysfunctional!!

24
Summary

• Theories of attribution claim we aim to attribute
  behaviour to either internal (person) or external
  (situation) causes
• Kelley proposed models of covariation (data
  driven) configuration (theory driven)
• In reality these may interact i.e. our
  expectations (schemata) may influence what data
  are processed i.e. what observations made

25
References

• Hewstone Stroebe (2001) Introduction to Social
  Psychology, Chapter 7.
• Fraser Burchell (2001) Introducing Social
  Psychology, Chapter 11.