Actors' and Observers' attributions,self-serving bias and positivity bias

An experiment was conducted to investigate the influence of evaluative factors upon preference for situational and dispositional attributions. Subjects listened to a tape recording of a group discussion on smoking, two actors presenting arguments in favour of smoking and two actors arguing against smoking. Subjects were then asked to explain in attributional terms the actors' behaviour and their own smoking behaviour, their evaluation of smoking being separately assessed. Results provided no support for a general self-other attributional difference; subjects did not explain their own behaviour in more situational terms while explaining the behaviour of others in more dispositional terms. Findings indicated that individuals generally attributed positively evaluated behaviour to dispositional factors and negatively evaluated behaviour to situational factors, regardless of attributor role (actor or observer). The results are interpreted as offering support for a positivity bias in attributional preference.     

Intuitions about situational correction in self and others

People's attributional phenomenology is likely to be characterized by effortful situational correction. Drawing on this phenomenology and on people's desire to view themselves more favorably than others, the authors hypothesized that people expect others to engage in less situational correction than themselves and to make more extreme dispositional attributions for constrained actors' behavior. In 2 studies, people expected their peers to make more extreme dispositional inferences than they did themselves for a situationally constrained actor's behavior. People's expectation that they engage in more situational correction than their peers was diminished among Japanese participants, who have less desire to view themselves as superior to their peers (Study 3), and among participants who were led to view dispositional attributions more favorably than situational attributions (Study 4).     

Attributional inference across cultures: similar automatic attributions and different controlled corrections

Five studies examined the automatic and controlled components of attributional inference in U.S. and East Asian (EA) samples. Studies 1 through 3 used variations of the "anxious woman" paradigm, manipulating the inferential goal (dispositional or situational) and the normative impact of situational constraint information (discounting or augmenting). In each study, U.S. and EA participants under cognitive load produced strong automatic attributions to the focus of their inferential goal (dispositional or situational). Compared with the U.S. cognitive load participants, U.S. no load participants corrected their attributions according to the normative rules of inference. In contrast, EA no load participants corrected in the direction of situational causality, even when the specific content of the situational information provided should have promoted stronger dispositional inferences. Studies 4 and 5 examined and ruled out alternative accounts. Results are discussed in terms of a situational causality heuristic present in EA individuals.     

Dispositional and situational moderators of female and male causal attributions

To increase understanding of the relationships between gender and causal attributions, dispositional and situational variables were examined to determine if they affected causal attributions differently if the subjects were females or males. Four dispositional variables—locus of control, neuroticism, achievement motivation, and self-esteem—and five situational variables—expectancy of success, self-reported commitment, perceived productivity, perceived task complexity, and actual performance—were examined for their moderating effects on the gender-causal attributional relationships. The dispositional variables did not moderate any causal relationships. By comparison, four situational variables—performance, commitment, productivity, and complexity—moderated at least one of the gender-attribution relationships. It was concluded that more attention should be directed to the identification of situational moderators.     

Adaptive thinking: Can adaptive dispositional attributions protect against the harmful effects of maladaptive situational attributions?

ObjectivesThe study was designed to examine if dispositional team-referent attributions moderate relationships between situational team-referent attributions and collective efficacy.DesignIn this cross-sectional design investigation, team athletes completed measures of dispositional team-referent attributions, situational team-referent attributions, and collective efficacy. Team outcome (i.e., win-loss status) was recorded.MethodAthletes (N = 163) on sport teams (K = 17) completed a measure of dispositional team-referent attributions (i.e., attributional style). They also completed a measure of situational team-referent attributions in reference to their most recent team competition and a measure of collective efficacy in reference to their next upcoming team competition.ResultsFollowing team victory, simple slopes analysis revealed a moderating effect such that adaptive dispositional team-referent attributions appeared to protect against the effects of maladaptive situational team-referent attributions on collective efficacy. This trend was demonstrated across stability and globality attribution dimensions. Following team defeat, no significant interaction effects were observed.ConclusionsThe results suggest that developing adaptive dispositional attributions after success may protect athletes from experiencing deleterious effects of maladaptive situational attributions. Future research is needed to confirm these results and understand how these results can be applied to attributional retraining interventions in sport.     

Dispositional attribution: multiple inferences about motive-related traits

This research views dispositional inference as a process whereby perceivers integrate multiple inferences about a target person's motives and traits. The findings suggest that although perceived motives may stimulate extra attributional processing (S. Fein, 1996), the content of the inferred motive is important as well. Perceivers learned about situational forces implying that a target person had free choice, no choice, or an ulterior motive for helpful behavior. Inferences about the target's helpfulness differed depending on whether the target's behavior was attributed to an obedience motive (no-choice condition) or to a selfish motive (ulterior-motive condition). In general, inferences about motives were more predictive of dispositional inferences than were global causal attributions (to situational vs. dispositional forces) or base rate assumptions.     

Attributional Bias in Counselors' Diagnoses: The Effect of Resources1

Three experiments were conducted to test a model of attributional bias in counseling diagnosis. The model predicted that (a) available helping resources influence diagnostic attributions and (b) this effect is mediated by the effect resources have on the diagnostician's perception of his or her helping role. In each experiment, undergraduates served as diagnosticians in a simulated referral agency. Referral resouces for half of the subjects were oriented toward dealing with personal problems; resources for the other half were oriented toward dealing with situational problems. In referring each client, subjects indicated whether they perceived the problem to lie with the client (a dispositional atrribution) or with his social environment (a situational attribution). As predicted, subjects with person-oriented resources were more likely to perceive clients' problems to be dispositional than were subjects with situation-oriented resources. Results of Experiment 3 indicated that this effect was mediated by the influences resources had on subjects' perception of their helping role.     

Consider the situation: Reducing automatic stereotyping through Situational Attribution Training

The present research investigated the effectiveness of a new technique for reducing automatic biases rooted in attribution theory - the Situational Attribution Training Technique. The goal of this strategy extends previous work by targeting the fundamental attributional pillars underlying automatic stereotyping. We aimed to circumvent the well-documented tendency for individuals to be overly reliant on dispositional attributions when perceiving negative stereotype-consistent behaviors performed by outgroup members. By teaching participants to consider situational attributions for such behaviors, we expected a reduction in outgroup stereotyping. Specifically, White participants were trained extensively to choose situational over dispositional explanations for negative stereotype-consistent behaviors performed by Black men. Across two experiments, participants who completed Situational Attribution Training demonstrated reduced automatic racial stereotyping on a person categorization task, relative to control participants who exhibited substantial automatic stereotyping. The implications of these findings for the nature and reduction of intergroup biases are discussed.     

On difficult questions and evident answers: dispositional inference from role-constrained behavior

The present research investigated the underlying processes of how perceivers draw correspondent dispositional inferences about two interacting targets in the presence of situationally induced role constraints. Specifically, it is argued that a sufficient under-standing of role-dependent attributional biases (e.g., the fundamental attribution error) requires a separate consideration of the respective dispositional inference processes about each of the tar-gets involved, particularly with respect to deliberate attributional inferences. Employing the quiz-role paradigm results from four experiments generally support this assumption. Moreover, the present findings suggest that perceivers are much more sensitive to situationally induced role constraints than previous results may suggest. Implications for the fundamental attribution error and theories of dispositional inference are discussed.     

Dispesitional Bias in Trained Therapists' Diagnoses: Does It Exist?1

Therapists have been charged with a dispositional bias in their diagnoses of clients' problems. While a, review of prior research revealed considerable evidence that at least some trained therapists were more dispositional in their diagnoses than nonprofessionals, there was no clear evidence that therapists' dispositional diagnoses were in error. Therefore, an experiment was conducted to try to detect error in trained therapists' diagnoses. Twelve trained therapists and 16 untrained nonprofessionals each conducted intake interviews with two clients (confederates). Employing a technique based on attribution theory, one client presented a problem that was relatively situational; the other presented a problem that was relatively dispositional. Consistent with previous research, trained therapists were more dispositional in their diagnoses than were untrained nonprofessionals, suggesting that some bias did exist. But there was no clear evidence that therapists were less sensitive than nonprofessionals to differences between situational and dispositional problems. It was concluded that, to the degree that bias implies error, the charge of bias in therapists' diagnoses remains unproven.     

Measurement and interpretation of situational and dispositional attributions

Four problems with the measurement of situational and dispositional causality are reviewed. These are: the assumption that dispositional and situational causality are inversely linked; the diversity of the causes considered within the situational and dispositional categories; the difficulties of differentiating between causes internal and external to the actor; and the low convergent validity of various closed-ended attribution measures. A study reaffirms the lack of convergence among closed-ended measures and between closed and open-ended measures as well. In a second study, subjects' ratings of closed-ended attributions are taken as indicators that a freely chosen to not freely chosen dimension may better represent subjects' attributional thought than the internal/external dimension does. Open-ended data from the convergence study are recoded using this scheme and achieve significantly better convergence with closed-ended data. The implications of this redefinition for solving the various measurement problems are discussed.     

Processing alternative explanations of behavior: correction or integration?

Three experiments investigated how activation of knowledge about situational forces affects discounting in dispositional inference tasks. Each experiment varied a different knowledge activation factor--salience, accessibility, or specificity of situational information. In addition, all 3 experiments varied situational demands and cognitive load. The results showed that cognitive load eliminated discounting when situational information was low in salience, accessibility, or specificity. However, when situational information was more salient, accessible, or specific, it produced strong discounting effects even when perceivers were under cognitive load. These results are discussed in terms of correction and integration models of dispositional inferences from behavior.     

Empathy and attribution: turning observers into actors.

A laboratory experiment was conducted to test Jones and Nisbett's information-processing explanation of the often-observed tendency for individuals (actors) to provide relatively more situational and less dispositional causal attributions for their behavior than those provided by observers of the same behavior. According to this explanation, aspects of the situation are phenomenologically more salient for actors, whereas characteristics of the actor and his behavior are more salient for observers. To test this explanation, the phenomenological perspective of observers are altered without making available any additional information. Subjects watched a videotape of a get-acquainted conversation after instructions either to observe a target conversant or to empathize with her. As predicted, taking the perspective of the target through empathy resulted in attributions that were relatively more situational and less dispositional than attributions provided by standard observers. The results support Jones and Nisbett's information-processing explanation of actor-observer attributional differences, and shed additional light on the process of empathy.     

Delinquent personality types and the situational contexts of their crimes

Eysenck's theory is quoted as an example of a dispositional crime theory. This is in direct contrast to situational crime theory which rejects the notion of the influence of fixed psychological characteristics and stresses the importance of immediate situational stimuli in the explanation of crime. Recent studies of Eysenck's theory have argued the heterogeneity of personality types in the delinquent population, and following Eysenck's suggestion the offences committed by different personality types have been investigated. In the absence of positive results the present research seeks to progress beyond the offence label to compare different personality types on a range of offence-related situational features. This is viewed as an attempt to accommodate situational considerations in what remains essentially a dispositional approach. Similar deliquent personality types to recent studies merge, but they could not be distinguished across the situational-context factors of their offences. However, an alternative methodology to investigate this question is proposed.     

Orientation,Outcome, and Other-Serving Attributions

In this research, I examined the role of a communal orientation in producing other-serving attributional biases often found in jointly produced performance tasks. I hypothesized that the other-serving attributional responses, which are commonly found in dyadic decision-making tasks, originate from dispositional qualities that reflected an other-oriented construal of the self. Subjects completed a Communal Orientation Scale that purports to measure a dispositional tendency toward communal relationships with others. Next, they participated in a joint decision-making task with a partner for which they were given success or failure feedback. Then, subjects attributed responsibility for that performance. Results support the dispositional orientation hypothesis. Subjects who scored high in a communal orientation toward others gave more credit to their partners after a successful performance and blamed them less following failure. Attributions to the self remained unaffected by communal orientation. Implications of these data for future work in the areas dyadic interaction and cross-cultural attributions are considered.     

On seeing human: a three-factor theory of anthropomorphism

Anthropomorphism describes the tendency to imbue the real or imagined behavior of nonhuman agents with humanlike characteristics, motivations, intentions, or emotions. Although surprisingly common, anthropomorphism is not invariant. This article describes a theory to explain when people are likely to anthropomorphize and when they are not, focused on three psychological determinants--the accessibility and applicability of anthropocentric knowledge (elicited agent knowledge), the motivation to explain and understand the behavior of other agents (effectance motivation), and the desire for social contact and affiliation (sociality motivation). This theory predicts that people are more likely to anthropomorphize when anthropocentric knowledge is accessible and applicable, when motivated to be effective social agents, and when lacking a sense of social connection to other humans. These factors help to explain why anthropomorphism is so variable; organize diverse research; and offer testable predictions about dispositional, situational, developmental, and cultural influences on anthropomorphism. Discussion addresses extensions of this theory into the specific psychological processes underlying anthropomorphism, applications of this theory into robotics and human-computer interaction, and the insights offered by this theory into the inverse process of dehumanization.     

Behavior identification as a mediator of dispositional inference.

According to Trope's (1986) 2-stage model, the use of situational information ("A was teased") to identify behavior ("A reacted aggressively") may result in subsequent dispositional inferences ("A is an aggressive person") that seem insensitive to situational information. Two determinants of the situational biasing effect on behavior identification were varied, namely, behavior ambiguity and order of situational and behavioral information. It was found that when behavior was ambiguous and preceded by situational information, the latter affected behavior identification but not dispositional inference; in contrast, when behavior was unambiguous or when it was followed by situational information, the latter affected dispositional inference but not behavior identification. Thus, the same conditions that allowed situational information to bias behavior identification also nullified the effect of situational information on dispositional inference.     

The conceptualization and measurement of attributions

Substantial knowledge has been gained about the information processing that underlies attribution, biases and errors in the perception of causation and responsibility, and several types of consequences of attribution. We have far less systematic information about the adequacy of those measures typically employed to elicit attributions. Several issues in the conceptualization and measurement of attributions are explored in this paper, drawing on confirmatory factor analyses of attributions in two related samples. Central issues include: (1) the validity and reliability of several types of attributional measures; (2) the relationship between dispositional and situational attributions; and (3) the specificity and meaning of particular attributional categories.     

Attributions and sex differences in achievement: Problems and new perspectives

The status of research on sex differences in attribution is reviewed in light of the articles published in this issue. The authors conclude that several widely held beliefs about sex differences in attributions may be unwarranted. Various explanations for the lack of consistent results in studies exploring situational and dispositional effects on sex differences in attributions are offered. The authors conclude that alternative attributional questions need to be raised and investigated in order to understand sex differences in achievement.     

The effect of life expectancy on aggression and generativity: A life history perspective

Following a model that is inclusive of both dispositional and situational influences on life-history behaviors and attitudes, the effect of life expectancies on aggression and generativity was examined. Consistent with the hypotheses it was found that shorter life expectancies led to an increase in the desire to aggress and a decrease in the desire to engage in generative behaviors. The results are discussed in terms of how life history theory can be used to frame research on person-situation interactions.