Attribution theory and unemployment: Kelley's covariation model,self-esteem,and locus of control

The validity of applying Kelley, 1967, Kelley, 1973, 28, 107–128) to understanding the perceived causes of success and failure of others' job seeking activities was first tested in a laboratory study before testing the same theory on the self-attributions made by 82 unemployed in a field study. The field study also examined the relationship of self-esteem and locus of control to attributions for success and failure. In general Kelley's theory was supported by the results from the laboratory study but only two of the twelve predicted relationships were found in the field study. Low distinctiveness (weak workrelated skills) was associated with strong attributions to lack of ability and low consistency (past job seeking activities successful) with strong attributions to bad luck. As predicted the unemployed with high self-esteem and an internal locus of control attributed failure to lack of effort and credited their success to ability. Unemployed with low self-esteem and an external locus of control attributed success to unstable factors, but failure was not attributed to lack of ability. Possible reasons offered for the lack of support for Kelley's theory in the field study included the influence of group identity, individual differences in the perception of the stability and locus of causes, the greater realism of the field setting, and the inadequacy of the assumptions underlying the model.     

Necessary versus sufficient causal schemata for success and failure

197 subjects judged the perceived presence or absence of ability or effort, given information about task outcome (success or failure), the difficulty of the task (easy, intermediate, or difficult), and the state of the complementary cause (effort or ability). The data revealed that a multiple sufficient causal schema is used to explain common events. That is, the presence of ability or effort is perceived as enough to produce success at an easy task, while the absence of ability or effort is perceived as sufficient to result in failure at a difficult task. On the other hand, a multiple necessary schema tends to be employed to explain uncommon events. Success at a difficult task is believed to require both ability and effort, while failure at an easy task tends to be perceived as caused by low ability and low effort. In addition, there were disparities in the causal judgments for success and failure: failure outcomes are more likely to elicit a multiple sufficient schema. Further, in achievement-related contexts ability and effort are perceived as negatively covarying causal determinants of typical successes and failures. In addition to supporting hypotheses from attribution theory, the data shed further light upon the perceived determinants of success and failure, and demonstrate the influence of cognitive structures on achievement-related causal judgments.     

An empirical test of the covariation analysis in causal attribution

The present investigation was designed to reveal the cognitive inference processes associated with both detection and utilization of covariation information in causal attribution. Male undergraduates were (a) informed that a test was easy or difficult and shown a videotape in which (b) the test-taker's performance was high or low, and (c) covariation between the test-taker's effort expenditure and trial-by-trial outcome was present or absent. High performance was attributed to the test-taker's effort and ability, whereas low performance was attributed to the difficulty of the test. However, recognition of the covariance relationship decreased the attribution of high performance to ability and of low performance to test difficulty and increased the attribution of low performance to effort. Effort attribution in the high performance condition was independent of covariation information. The results are discussed in terms of the relationship between covariation information and typical beliefs about the causes of achievement outcomes.     

Figural emphasis and person perception

Based on Jones and Nisbett's (1972) proposition that actor-observer differences in causal attributions derive from differences in attentional focus, it was hypothesized that observers' focus of attention would influence their causal attributions for an actor's behavior. More specifically, it was predicted that the behavior of an actor who was the focus of attention by virtue of some salient physical attribute would be attributed by observers more to dispositional causes and less to situational causes than would the behavior of a less physically salient actor. The manipulations of physical salience were based upon Gestalt laws of figural emphasis in object perception. They included brightness (Study I), motion (Study II), pattern complexity (Study III), and contextual novelty (Studies IV and V). The results revealed that the salinece of the actors' environments (i.e., the other people present) rather than the salience of the actor him/herself had the most consistent influence on causal attributions. When environmental salience was high, behavior was attributed relatively more situationally than when it was low. Prior research findings are considered in light of the proposition that causal attributions for an actor's behavior vary only with the salience of his/her environment, and additional implications of this phenomenon are suggested. Some ambiguities in the application of Gestalt principles to the perception of people are discussed.     

Book review

Long-standing beliefs about one's self-efficacy and learning ability accumulate over the school years. Attributions, or causal perceptions and interpretations, of behavioural outcomes are also based on a person's learning history. And, it is evident from research on attributional bias and self-esteem that the perceived causes of success and failure have consequences for academic success. An important perspective on attributions, frequently neglected in educational research, pertains to content-specific beliefs about one's competence. We set up a field study in which students from the first form of secondary education were asked to report their causal attributions of regular school examinations in three school subjects: history, native language, and mathematics. The results suggest that students generate different causal attributions for successful or unsuccessful examinations, belonging to different school-subjects. Perception of specific examination conditions may or may not urge students to generate specific attributions. There is evidence for both school-subject specificity and examination-specificity in the observed causal attributions. But, the effect of school-subject seems to be more pronounced than the effect of examination. Information at the momentary level (examination conditions) interacts with information at the middle level (school-subject). Closer analyses of the observed causal attributions vis-à-vis perceived success and failure in the three school-subjects displayed marked differences, especially in relation to the effort attributions.     

The development of beliefs about spelling and their relationship to spelling performance

This study examined relations among spelling performance and students' beliefs about spelling, including self-efficacy for spelling ability, outcome expectancy for spelling, and attributions for good spelling across grades 4, 7, and 10. Spelling self-efficacy remained relatively constant across grades. Spelling outcome expectancies for adult life and school declined across grades, as did effort and ability attributions for spelling success, with a disproportional decrease in ability attributions between grades 4 and 7. Self-efficacy was the strongest predictor of spelling performance at all grade levels; attribution for ability entered into the regression for grade 4 students, while outcome expectancies for school and writing were more important in grades 7 and 10. Cluster analyses on the grade 10 sample showed that students with high efficacy as spellers and high outcome expectancy of spelling for writing were the best spellers, with the highest performance reserved for those who attributed good spelling more to effort than ability. The impact of spelling instruction on developing beliefs is discussed.     

Depression and causal attributions for success and failure

The present study investigated the effects of depression on causal attributions for success and failure. Specifically, female university students were separated into depressed and nondepressed groups on the basis of Costello--Comrey Depression Scale scores, and then received either 20%, 55%, or 80% reinforcement on a word association task. Following the task, attributions were made for outcome using the four factors of effort, ability, task difficulty, and luck. In accord with predictions generated from a self-serving biases hypothesis, nondepressives made internal (ability, effort) attributions for a successful outcome (80% reinforcement) and external attributions (luck, task difficulty) for a failure outcome (20% reinforcement). As predicted from consideration of the self-blame component of depression, the attributions made by depressives for a failure outcome were personal or internal. Contrary to expectations, depressives also made internal attributions for a successful outcome. The findings for depressives were discussed in relation to the recently revised learned helplessness model of depression, which incorporates causal attributions. For nondepressives, the findings were considered in terms of the self-serving biases hypothesis.     

The self-serving attributional bias: Beyond self-presentation

An experiment was conducted to provide empirical support for the notion that asymmetrical causal attributions for favorable and unfavorable outcomes result from a self-serving attributional bias that occurs independently of self-presentational concerns. Subjects did either well or poorly on an ego-involving test for which their performance, attributions, and evaluations of the test were either public or private. A pattern of self-serving responses for subjects' attributions and evaluations of the test was found in the private conditions, thus providing evidence of the influence of outcome favorability on individuals' perceptions of causality. Theoretical and practical implications of these finding are discussed and suggestions for future research are offered.     

Improving the Performance of Failing Students by Overcoming Their Self-Serving Attributional Biases

The causal impact of attributions on academic performance was examined by changing low-scoring students' attributions regarding their poor performances. Initially, when students who were failing a college course identified the cause of the performance, they emphasized external, uncontrollable causes. Because these self-serving attributions could have perpetuated poor performance on subsequent examinations, students in the experimental condition were exposed to information that suggested that grades in college are caused by internal, controllable factors such as effort and motivation. As predicted, on subsequent tests and on the final examination, these students earned higher grades than control students who received no attributional information. These findings lend support to an attributional model of academic achievement and also suggest that educational interventions that shift attributions away from a self-serving pattern to a performance-facilitating pattern may improve academic outcomes.     

Causal attributions for behaviors consistent or inconsistent with an actor's personality traits: Differences between those offered by actors and observers

The present research was designed to investigate differences in the attributions offered from the actor's perspective and the observer's perspective. It was predicted that causal attributions for behaviors inconsistent with an actor's personality traits would be more situational when offered from the actor's perspective than when offered from the observer's perspective. In contrast, it was predicted that causal attributions for behaviors consistent with an actor's personality traits would be more dispositional when offered from the actor's perspective than when offered from the observer's perspective. Consistent with these hypotheses, extraverts explained introverted behaviors and introverts explained extraverted behaviors more situationally from the actor's perspective than from the observer's perspective. Furthermore, extraverts explained extraverted behaviors and introverts explained introverted behaviors more dispositionally from the actor's perspective than from the observer's perspective. These differences in the attributions offered by actors and observers were attenuated but not eliminated when attributors had access to useful situational information with which to apply the discounting principle.     

Effort is virtuous,but it's better to have ability: Evaluative responses to perceptions of effort and ability

Evaluative responses to imagined task outcomes were found to depend on the question asked, as well as on perceptions of effort and ability. When university students were asked when they would experience pride or shame, they indicated effort would increase pride over success and reduce shame over failure. On the other hand, when asked what type of person they would like to be they chose high ability regardless of outcome. This modified Weiner's (1972) statement of the relation of causal attributions and affective expression. Individual differences in responses to these questions related to differences in self-concept of ability. This result suggested extensions of the attributional analysis of achievement motivation.     

Causal Relationships among Self-Concept,Attributions, and Achievement in Filipino Students

Abstract

Path-analytic models linking measures of self-concept, attributions, and grades of 194 Filipino high school students were examined. Attributions for successful outcomes to ability or effort were found to mediate the causal relationship between achievement and self-esteem within specific areas of academic content. Negative paths leading from ability attributions for success in math to reading self-concept and for success in reading to math self-concept were interpreted to reflect the simultaneous operation of internal and external frames of reference (Marsh & Shavelson, 1985).     

CAUSAL ATTRIBUTIONS BY JAPANESE AND AMERICAN MOTHERS AND CHILDREN ABOUT PERFORMANCE IN MATHEMATICS*

In this study we examined the possibility that causal inferences about performance may help explain the relatively superior achievement of Japanese students in mathematics. Data from mothers and children in Japan and the U.S. were examined for (a) attributions about causes of performance in math; (b) intra-family transmission of beliefs; and (c) effect of sex of child on attributions. Results showed that Japanese mothers and children emphasized effort, particularly for low performance, while American mothers and children emphasized ability. Beliefs of mothers and children were similar within country but not within family, suggesting that transmission is diffuse. Differences in attributions about performance of boys and girls did not appear in Japan and in the U.S. appeared for mothers only. The emphasis placed on attributions to effort seems to offer a highly motivating context for Japanese students.     

Causal internalization of academic performance as a function of self-esteem and performance satisfaction

In the present investigation, we integrated self-theories (specifically, theories of cognitive consistency and self-esteem) with attribution theory. Our intent was to clarify the effects of different levels of self-esteem and performance satisfaction on causal internalization of academic performance. Subjects were 162 university students who attributed causality for their individual performances on a midterm examination. Attributions to four internal and four external causal sources were analyzed with a 2 × 2 (Self-Concept × Performance Satisfaction) MANOVA and with follow-up univariate F ratios. Most of the findings support the predictions based on self-esteem theory; i.e., satisfaction with performance, rather than consistency of performance with self-esteem, served as the primary influence on internalization of causality, with students internalizing satisfying outcomes more than dissatisfying outcomes. Cognitive-consistency theory and B. Weiner's (1979, Journal of Educational Psychology, 71, 3–25) attribution proposal regarding maintenance of a stable self-concept also received support, as attributions to the internal and stable causal sources of ability and general effort were a function of an interaction of self-esteem and performance satisfaction. Hence, neither self-theory adequately anticipated the effects of self-esteem and performance satisfaction on causal internalization. Rather, a consolidation of theories is needed to explain the results.     

Do causal attributions mediate the effects of extrinsic rewards on intrinsic interest?

Many investigators have demonstrated that task-contingent extrinsic incentives can reduce an individual's interest in some intrinsically rewarding task. Although it has been widely assumed that this “undermining effect” is mediated by the individual's causal attributions for engaging in the task, there has been little independent verification of this notion. In the present study subjects were asked to perform an inherently interesting problem-solving task. Half of the subjects were told that they could earn money by solving the task successfully (Money condition), whereas the other half were not (Control condition). Consistent with previous research, Money condition subjects expressed less liking for the task. In addition, Many condition participants attributed their task performance to less internal causes. Furthermore, across conditions, subjects who attributed their behavior to less internal causes were less apt to enjoy the task. The present data, therefore, more convincingly implicate the mediating role of causal attributions in the relationship between extrinsic rewards and intrinsic interest. Alternative explanations are discussed.     

Active and passive observers' attraction to a self-disclosing other

Active observer (participant) subjects were induced to make either a high or a low intimacy disclosure about themselves to a partner. Their (videotaped confederate) partner then disclosed either intimately or non-intimately in return. The impressions and attributions of these subjects were compared to the predictions of passive observer subjects (non-participants) who were each furnished with the original instructions, heard a tape recording of a different active observer's disclosure, and watched the same videotape of the confederate that person had seen. As expected, both active observers' responses and passive observers' predictions indicated a preference for the intimate partner. In addition, passive observers' attraction predictions were less positive than active observers' reports. But contrary to the hypotheses, passive observers predicted that active observers would attribute the partner's disclosure more to personalistic causes than was actually the case, and guessed inaccurately that active observers would interpret the partner's intimacy as an indicator of attraction. The methodological implications of these active-passive observer differences for research in self-disclosure and relationships are discussed.     

Causal explanations for school performance: Contrasts between mothers and children

This study investigated the causal attributions given by mothers and their fifth and sixth grade children to explain the children's success in a school subject of relatively high achievement as well as their failure in an area of low performance. Participants were asked to weight the importance of four attributions: ability, effort, personality, and training. Analyses of variance revealed significant differences between mothers' and children's weightings. Mothers cited children's ability as the main cause of success, while lack of effort was viewed as the reason for failure. Children, in contrast, gave effort as the explanation for success and lack of ability as the reason for failure. The apparent lack of concordance between mothers' and children's causal beliefs is discussed in terms of three explanatory possibilities: (a) actor/observer differences, (b) the effects of the affective bond between mother and child, and (c) the tendency toward self-presentational bias.     

Sex differences in attribution for occupational success

A study was conducted to both test and extend Deaux's (Sex: A perspective on the attribution process. In J. H. Harvey, W. J. Ickes, & R. F. Kidd, (Eds.), New directions in attribution research, Volume 1. Hillsdale, N.J.: Erlbaum, 1976) expectancy model of sex-linked differences in attribution for success. Specifically, it was hypothesized that female occupational subjects would attribute success more to the unstable causes of effort and luck, as well as the stable internal cause of interpersonal skill, while male occupational subjects would make higher attributions to the stable causes of ability and task ease. This hypothesis was supported for the causes of effort, luck, and task ease. Additionally, a comparison between sex differences in attribution occurring within a nonpersonal vs. personal frame of reference showed three of the expected sex differences in attribution to be stronger in the latter condition. Moreover, it was shown that this difference was largely accounted for by changes in females' rather than males' attributions. A final hypothesis, namely, that males would perceive themselves as more successful in their occupations than females, was not confirmed.     

The effects of empathy and outcome on attribution: An examination of the divergent-perspectives hypothesis

Based on the theoretical ideas of Jones and Nisbett (Jones et al. Attribution: Perceiving the cause of behavior. New York: General Learning Press, 1971), and the recent findings of Regan and Totten (Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 32, 1975, 850–856), the present study assumed that from an attributional standpoint empathic observers and actors are functionally equivalent. On this basis it was predicted that empathic, relative to nonempathic, observers would make outcome attributions which have been typically found for actors themselves: They would attribute an actor's success to dispositional causes, but an actor's failure to situational causes. After instructions to empathize with the target, or to observe him, subjects watched a videotape of a target male attempting to make a good first impression on a female. Subjects later learned that the target had either succeeded or failed at making a good first impression, and were asked to make causal attributions for his outcome. As predicted, instructions to empathize led to dispositional attributions for success and situational attributions for failure, while standard observation instructions resulted in dispositional causal attributions regardless of outcome. The results were interpreted as supporting the contention that differential information processing may sufficiently account for the effects of outcome on causal attributions.