• Attribution Processes I
• Definition and Types of Attributions
• Each of us is a "naive scientist" looking for explanations for how and why things happen.
• Attribution theory helps us understand how we arrive at explanations (attribute the causes for) our behavior and the behavior of others.
• Two main types of attributions we can make:
• Internal attribution (person attribution): Attributing the cause for behavior to something internal to the individual (e.g., personality, intelligence, etc.)
• External attribution (situational attribution): Attribute the cause for behavior to something external to the individual (e.g., pressure from others)
• Attribution Processes II
• Theories of Attribution
• Attribution theories were developed to help us better understand how causal attributions are made.
• The two main theories of attribution are:
• Correspondent inference theory
• Covariation theory (causal attribution theory)
• Later, other theories were developed to help better understand attribution processes:
• Abnormal conditions theory
• Probabilistic contrast model
• Two and three step models
• Theories of Attribution I
• Correspondent Inference Theory
• A correspondent inference is made when a behavior is believed to correspond to a person's internal beliefs.
• We are likely to make a correspondent inference and an internal attribution when based on several pieces of information:
• Was the behavior freely chosen?
• Was the behavior intended?
• What are the consequences of the behavior (common vs. Noncommon effects)?
• The social desirability of the behavior
• An internal attribution is likely when we believe that the behavior was freely chosen, intended, had noncommon effects, and was low in social desirability
• Correspondent Inference Theory II
• An external attribution might be made if we believe the behavior is:
• Not freely chosen
• Unintended
• Has common effects
• Socially desirable
• The correspondence bias occurs when we make an internal attribution even when we know that there are external forces that could have caused the behavior.
• We overestimate the role of internal factors and underestimate the role of external factors.
• Theories of Attribution II
• Covariation Theory
• Correspondent inference theory focused on internal attributions
• Theory of causal attributions focuses on internal and external attributions.
• Three pieces of information used when making causal attributions:
• Consensus (what is everyone else doing)
• Consistency (does this person act this way all the time?)
• Distinctiveness (does this person show the behavior to all stimuli in a category or just one?)
• Causal Attribution Model (continued)
• The type of attribution made depends on the mix of the three types of information
• An external attribution is made when
• Consensus is high (Everyone argues with Bill)
• Consistency is high (Tom often argues with Bill)
• Distinctiveness is high (Tom only argues with Bill)
• An internal attribution is made when
• Consensus is low (Nobody else argues with Bill)
• Consistency is high (Tom often argues with Bill)
• Distinctiveness is low (Tom argues with just about everyone)
• All three pieces of information are not used equally. Consensus information is underused.

• Other Models of Attribution I
• Abnormal Conditions Theory
• Attribution processes energized only when something unusual happens or behavior does not meet our expectations
• Under such abnormal conditions we are motivated to find an explanation for the behavior
• Probabalistic Contrast Model
• When we are faced with more than one potential cause for a behavior we generate a focal set of potential causes.
• A factor can be a cause if it regularly occurs in the presence of the outcome (e.g., lightning can be a cause of a fire)
• A factor can be an enabling condition if its presence makes an outcome more likely (e.g., dry conditions make a fire more likely, but don't cause the fire)

• Other Models of Attribution II
• Once we have distinguished the various kinds of factors in the focal set, we assign probabilities to the various factors (potential causes) and contrast the probabilities to decide which is most likely to be the actual cause.
• The Two-Step Model of Attribution
• Step 1: Categorize behavior (e.g., illegal behavior). This first step often happens automatically.
• Step 2: Make inferences about the individual's personality (e.g., a person broke the law, therefore he is dishonest)
• The Three-Step Model of Attribution
• Step 1: Categorize behavior
• Step 2: Make an internal attribution
• Step 3: Adjust internal attribution as new information comes in
• The Fundamental Attribution Error (FAE) I
• Tendency to overestimate the role of internal characteristics when judging the behavior of others.
• Situational factors tend to be discounted.
• Information about situational factors may be discounted even if we are aware of it.
• The FAE occurs because of two factors:
• The figure-ground relationship: basic to all forms of perception
• Our perceptual processes are directed outward toward the world
• When perceiving social situations others are figure (which capture our attention) and we are the ground.
• The Fundamental Attribution Error (FAE) II
• Cultural influences
• Western culture emphasizes personal responsibility; we expect individuals to take personal responsibility for their actions
• Eastern culture places less emphasis on personal responsibility
• Greater tendency for FAE to be made in western culture
• There are no differences in predisposition to make FAE among young children across cultures. In older children there is a difference with western children more likely to make the error.
• Tendency to make FAE is socialized into the child
• The Fundamental Attribution Error (FAE) III
• Factors contributing to the FAE
• The FAE is reduced if you make a person more aware that there are situational forces that could affect behavior
• If you must justify your attributions to others, the FAE is weakened
• You are less likely to make the FAE with people you know as opposed to strangers
• As time passes you may switch an FAE-related internal attribution to an external attribution as you have time to think about the behavior and the situation more carefully.
• Attribution Biases Related to the FAE I
• Failure to take into account social roles
• Tend to make internal attribution when we fail to take into account a social role
• For example, you see your teachers as "smart" because you fail to take into account the fact that they have extensively studied their subject matter.
• Even very "smart" people can't answer everything
• See the "quiz show phenomenon" Focus Box
• The actor-observer effect
• A specific application of the FAE
• Tendency to attribute negative behavior of others to internal forces and the same negative behavior to external factors for ourselves.

• Attribution Biases Related to the FAE II
• Example: Someone cuts you off on the highway, he is an "$#@%$ ^%$#%^". You do the same to someone and "your view was blocked by a truck," "he came out of nowhere," etc

2. Self-serving bias

a. Tendency to perceive ourselves in the best light possible

• Take credit for positive behaviors (internal attribution), at the same time we blame failures on outside forces (external attribution)
• Reasons for self-serving bias:
• Desire to protect self esteem (stronger explanation)
• Self-presentation: Maintaining a positive public image
• Attribution Biases Related to the FAE III
• Self-handicapping
• Two forms of self-handicapping
• Providing yourself with a ready excuse for potential failure (e.g., big test the next day, you do everything but study). If you fail, you have a ready external attribution. If you succeed, you can really inflate your self image
• After an initial, unexpected success, a person may put up obstacles to future success; especially if the initial success is perceived to be a fluke.
• Example: Golfer John Daly unexpectedly won the PGA tournament (a major tournament). After winning he began drinking heavily, fought with other golfers and fans. Diminished his future success for a couple of years.
• Attributions About Success and Failure I
• Three kinds of information used to explain success and failure:
• Locus of causation (internal vs. external)
• Controllability (the degree to which a person believes success or failure can be directly controlled.
• Stability (stability of characteristics that lead to success or failure: Stable=fixed, Unstable: fluctuate)
• There is a link between the attributions we make about success and failure and future behavior
• Internal/Unstable: Fail exam, attribute to lack of motivation- work harder next time
• Internal/Stable: Fail exam, attribute to lack of ability-give up
• The attributions we make about success and failure have emotional consequences. Success yields positive emotions, failure negative emotions.
• Attributions About Success and Failure II
• Consequences of Attribution Patterns
• Failure attributed to internal/stable/uncontrollable factors leads to negative emotions (depression, helplessness) and a person may give up trying to improve
• Failure attributed to internal/stable/controllable factors leads to increased effort and possible future success.
• Some people have a tendency to externalize failure. This has three consequences:
• Preserves self-esteem
• Changes expectations of others about one's future performance
• Reduces frustration and anger over failure
• Externalizing failure may work in the short run, but in the long run it may lead to a pattern of continued failure
• Getting a person to make attribute failure to internal, controllable factors has been shown to improve future performance.