Presentation on theme: "Section B Definitions, examples, thesis Attributions- inferred causes of behavior ▪ Fundamental attribution error (Ross, 1977)-Behavior of others."— Presentation transcript:
Definitions, examples, thesis Attributions- inferred causes of behavior ▪ Fundamental attribution error (Ross, 1977)-Behavior of others -internal, ignores external ▪ Self- serving bias-Own behavior-success-internal, failure-external ▪ Self- effacing bias ▪ Blaming the victim ▪ Actor-observer discrepancy Two of the most common attribution errors are the fundamental attribution error and the self-serving bias
FAE- Ross (1977) Evidence Jones & Harris (1967) SSB- Evidence Lau & Russell (1980) or Johnson (1964) Limitations- not consistent across cultures Self-effacing Bias in some collectivist cultures
Tendency to exaggerate the importance of dispositions and minimize situational if behavior is determined by personality, easier to predict future behavior We are cognitive misers- we don’t spend more effort than necessary and often take mental shortcuts Evidence: Jones & Harris, 1967 American participants given essays either for or against the Castro government ▪ Choice condition and No-choice condition (assigned the writing) ▪ FAE made when people assumed dispositional attribution in the no choice condition ▪ Nothing could be concluded about the authors attitude in the no- choice condition.
Tendency to attribute successful behavior to dispositional causes, but unsuccessful behavior to situational ones Maintains self-esteem (Miller, 1978) ▪ Self-enhancement, self-protection Evidence Johnson (1964)-students as teachers Lau and Russell (1980)-athletes and coaches attributed wins to internal factors, losses to external
Limitations- cross-cultural variations Miller (1984)- FAE: asked Indian Hindus and Americans; describe a person committing a good or bad act ▪ Americans (Dispostion-40%, Situation-18%) ▪ Indian Hindus (Situation/social role-40%, Dispostion-18%) Kashima & Triandis (1986 )Self-effacing bias in collectivist cultures, especially Japan Studies lack ecological validity