Attribution Theory Prepared by: Carmelo Perez Anceta Coc Manuel Canti Berrisford Cal Lavinia Cal Hermelinda Tush

Presentation Overview Background Purpose Definition Weiner’s Attribution Two General Types Fundamental Attribution Error Self-Serving Bias Making Attributions Implications for Teaching References

Background of Attribution theory Was developed over time from the theories of Fritz Heider, Edward Jones, Keith Davis, and Harold Kelley. All were social psychologists. Approximate year of origin: Heider first wrote about attribution theory in his book The Psychology of Interpersonal Relationships (1958) which played a central role in the origination and definition of attribution theory. Jones and Davis' systematic hypotheses about the perception of intention was published in 1965 in the essay "From Acts to Dispositions." Kelley published "Attribution in Social Psychology" in 1967.

Purpose of the Theory Attribution theory is about how people make causal explanations; about how they answer questions beginning with "why?" The theory deals with the information they use in making causal inferences, and with what they do with this information to answer causal questions. The theory developed within social psychology as a means of dealing with questions of social perception.

Definition Attribution theory is the area of cognitive therapy that is concerned with how people explain the causes of behavior, their own and those of others. A major concept in the study of attribution theory is locus of control (Internal vs. External).

Weiner’s Attribution Attribution theory assumes that people try to determine why people do what they do, that is, interpret causes to an event or behavior. An attribution can be defined by three stages: behavior must be observed/perceived behavior must be determined to be intentional behavior attributed to internal or external causes

Weiner’s Attribution According to him, the most important factors affecting attributions are ability, effort, task difficulty, and luck. His main focus is about achievement. Attributions are classified along three causal dimensions: Locus of control (two poles: internal vs. external) Stability (do causes change over time or not?) Controllability (causes one can control such as skills vs. causes one cannot control such as luck, others’ actions, etc.)

Two general types Personal Attribution Situational Attribution

Personal Attribution - Explanation in terms of personal characteristics Example: The baby must be a happy baby He scored well on the exam because he is smart. She tripped because she is clumsy.

Situational Attribution Explanations in terms of Situational factors Example: “Someone must have just played with the baby.” He scored well because it was an easy test. She tripped because of a squirrel.

Fundamental Attribution Error Is that we over estimate the power of the person and underestimate the power of the situation. Why do people make this error? *The situation is not salient when people make attribution for the behavior of others, but the situation is salient when making attribution for one’s own behavior. * Thus, people are more inclined to take the situation into account when explaining their own behavior

Self- Serving Bias People do not make objective situational/personal attributions for their own behavior. They tend to attribute their success to dispositional factors and their failures to situational factors.

How do people make attributions? Kelley argued that people take 3 factors into account when making a personal vs. situational: Consistency: the degree to which the actor performs that same behavior toward an object on different occasions. Distinctiveness: the degree to which the actor performs different behaviors with different objects. Consensus: the degree to which other actors perform the same behavior with the same object.

Choice leads to stronger attributions of liking. Cognitive dissonance theory: people strive for consistency Seems simple, but this idea lead to very counter- intuitive findings. Festinger and Carlsmith had participants who paid $1 to $20 to lie. One person was paid $1 to do this, and the other person was paid $20. Which person should like the task more?

Result Participants paid $1 enjoyed the task more than participants paid $20. The $20 person had consistent cognitions (“This is stupid, but I’m being compensated for doing it.”). The $1 person had inconsistent cognitions (“This is stupid, and I have no reason to do it.”). Participants in the $1 resolved the dissonance by changing their attitude about the task (“I’m not being adequately compensated for this, but that’s OK. This is actually fun!”).

There are three ways to eliminate dissonance: (1) reduce the importance of the dissonant beliefs, (2) add more consonant beliefs that outweigh the dissonant beliefs, (3) change the dissonant beliefs so that they are no longer inconsistent.

Self-Perception Theory People decide their own attitudes and feelings from watching their selves behave in various situations. Both participants observed their behavior (doing the task) and made a causal attribution for their own behavior. Participants in the $20 observed his/her own behavior and thought (“I’m doing this task because I’m getting paid.”). Participants in the $1 observed his/her own behavior and thought (“I’m doing this task because I must enjoy it.”).

Implications for teaching. Role models Reinforcement techniques Use incentives to make children care Reward system locus Stability Controllability

References Heider, F. (1958). The Psychology of Interpersonal. Relations. New York: Wiley. http://education.calumet.purdue.edu/vockell/edPsybook/Edpsy5/edpsy5_attribution.htm http://www.bookrags.com/research/attributions-theory-geca/ Attributions Theory from Encyclopedia of Childhood and Adolescence.© 2005-2006 Thomson Gale, a part of the Thomson Cooperation. Attribution Theory in the Organizational Sciences Theoretical and Empirical Contributions. Edited by Mark J. Martinko