On the nature and accuracy of attributions that change over time

“Actor” subjects engaged in a brief getting-acquainted conversation while “observer” subjects watched. Ratings of and causal attributions for behavior during the conversation were obtained immediately upon its conclusion and three weeks later from the same subjects and from an independent group of subjects not asked for immediate attributions. Comparison between immediate and the independent, “postponed” assessments showed that attributions by actors and observers tended to emphasize situational factors more over time, and personal factors less. Attributions by the “repeated assessment” subjects did not show a significant change over time, but their delayed attributions were significantly less likely to emphasize situational factors than were the delayed attributions of the “postponed assessment” group. The relative accuracy of these attributions could not, of course, be directly assessed. However, valid attributions presumably must be based upon valid perceptions or memories of the behaviors they seek to explain, and reliable criterion ratings of behaviors in the present study could be obtained from the experimenters. Actors' and observers' delayed behavior ratings agreed less with these criteria than did their immediate ratings, an indirect indication that attributions do not increase, and may decrease, in accuracy over time.     

Judgments of men's and women's feelings during hypothetical social interactions

We studied college students' perceptions of how good/bad and how powerful/powerless men and women feel during hypothetical social interactions. Stimuli were constructed by combining each of 16 behaviors that fell into four categories (negative, low power, sexual, and help) with each of four dyads (male-male, male-female, female-male, female-female). Subjects made judgments about the likelihood of each behavior occurring, and about how actors and recipients felt when engaging in each of 16 behaviors. Three themes pervaded the results. First, subjects perceived men to feel more powerful than women whether behaving as actors or recipients—especially during interactions with women. Second, subjects perceived behaviors to be more likely, and actors and recipients to feel better and more powerful when the interaction pattern was consistent with gender role norms. Third, subjects perceived recipients' affective responses as being more polarized in opposite-sex than in same-sex dyads. Results from this research show that subjects' perceptions about feelings are largely consistent with the literature on social interaction and sex role stereotypes, and are similar for male and female subjects. In addition, our results provide a rich set of hypotheses concerning whether perceptions of feelings reflect actual feelings and are related to interaction participants' actual behavior.     

Women's and men's willingness to self-disclose to therapists and friends: The moderating influence of instrumental,expressive, masculine,and feminine topics

The present study used the Masculine and Feminine Self-Disclosure Scale to investigate women's and men's willingness to self-disclose about the instrumental, expressive, masculine, and feminine aspects of themselves to four target persons: female and male therapists and friends. The data revealed that women's and men's willingness to self-disclose to therapists and friends was tempered by the gender of the target person and the particular “masculine” and “feminine” content of the disclosure topic. Men were more willing than women to discuss the global masculine aspects of themselves with a male friend. In contrast, women were more willing than men to discuss (1) their expressive behaviors with both female and male friends and (2) their global feminity with female and male therapists and friends. The discussion emphasizes gender role phenomena as an important dimension of women's and men's willingness to disclose personal information about their masculinity and femininity to therapists and friends.     

“Internally Wicked”: Investigating How and Why Essentialism Influences Punitiveness and Moral Condemnation

Kant argued that individuals should be punished “proportional to their internal wickedness,” and recent work has demonstrated that essentialism—the notion that observable characteristics reflect internal, biological, unchanging “essences”—influences moral judgment. However, these efforts have yielded conflicting results: essentialism sometimes increases and sometimes decreases moral condemnation. To resolve these discrepancies, we investigated the mechanisms by which essentialism influences moral judgment, focusing on perceptions of actors’ control over their behavior, the target of essentialism (particular behaviors vs. actors’ character), and the component of essentialism (biology vs. immutability). Participants punished people described as having a criminal essence more than those with a non-criminal essence or no essence. Probing potential mechanisms underlying this effect, we found a mediating role for perceptions of control and weak influences of essentialism focus (behavior vs. character) and component of essentialism (biology vs. immutability). These results extend prior work on essentialism and moral cognition, demonstrating a causal link between perceptions of “internal wickedness” and moral judgment. Our findings also resolve discrepancies in past work on the influence of essentialism on moral judgment, highlighting the role that perceptions of actors’ control over their behavior play in moral condemnation.     

Children's Trait and Emotion Attributions in Socially Ambiguous and Unambiguous Situations

Children's attributions about story characters in ambiguous and unambiguous social situations were assessed. One hundred and forty-four 6–7-year-olds and 10–11-year-olds heard about actors who slighted a recipient intentionally or for an undetermined reason and then made causal attributions about the events, an emotion attribution about the recipient, and global personality attributions about the actors and recipient. Relations between perceived self-competence and attribution style were also assessed. Participants were more likely to make negative causal attributions in the unambiguous condition and with increasing age. Older girls and younger boys were more likely than other groups to attribute negative emotions to the recipient. Overall, participants perceived recipients positively and actors negatively. Perceived self-competence was positively correlated with actor attributions, although these differed by age and gender. Implications for children's psychosocial adjustment are discussed.     

Observer orientation and actor-observer differences in attributions for failure

In a series of two experiments, male undergraduates either operated or watched another person operate a model racecar set. Instructions varied observers' expectancies about future involvement with the task. The drivers' causal attributions for their performance were compared with those of neutral observers as well as those of involved observers who anticipated running on the track. Predictions, derived from the Jones and Nisbett framework of actor/observer differences, were that actors should make more external than internal attributions and that neutral or “passive” observers should do the opposite. Moreover, the involved or “active” observer groups were expected to display attributional patterns similar to those of the actors. These predictions were confirmed. Results are discussed in terms of information and information-processing differences between groups.     

Sex-role orientation,achievement motivation,and causal attributions of college females

Female undergraduates were asked to state causal attributions for success or failure outcomes. Students worked in pairs so that one half of them cooperated with either a male or a female partner, while the other half competed with a male or female opponent. All female subjects were pretested on achievement motivation and sex-role orientation. Women who espoused the traditional feminine role were more self-derogating in causal attribution than nontraditional women. Achievement-oriented women, like their male counterparts, were more self-enhancing following failure. However, following competitive success against male opponents, women who scored high in achievement motivation were less self-enhancing than those who scored low.This article is part of a larger study originally prepared as the author's doctoral dissertation at Hofstra University, 1975. The author is indebted to Claire Ernhart, the dissertation chairperson, and to the committee members, Alfred Cohn and Dianne Krooth, for their guidance and support.     

Television and Sex-Role Stereotyping1

The possible influence of television on sex-stereotyped behavior was investigated in three studies. In Study I the portrayal of male and female central characters on children's Saturday morning television programs was examined, and a number of differences consistent with current sex-role stereotypes were found. Males and females were portrayed in different roles, they manifested different behaviors, and their behaviors were followed by different consequences. In addition, male characters were more frequent than females, and they exhibited higher rates of behavior. Similar differences in the portrayal of males and females in the commercial announcements accompanying these programs were found in Study II. The sexes differed in their frequency of appearance, their location, their roles, their expertise, and the consequences of their behavior. In Study III the effects on children's behavior of exposure to sex-stereotyped vs. non-stereotyped behavior by adult televised models were examined. It was found that children manifested greater imitation and recall for the behavior of a same-sex model with the result that boys exposed to “stereotyped” behavior by a male and female model manifested and recalled relatively more “masculine” behavior than those exposed to “non-stereotyped” behavior, while the opposite trend obtained for girls. Implications of these three studies for television's contribution to sex-stereotyped behavior are discussed.     

Evaluative expectations and the gender schema: Is failed inconsistency better?

Are evaluative assessments a part of the information that constitutes the gender stereotype? Two studies tested this question by presenting participants (50 female and 43 male college students, for whom English was their native language) with information that manipulated both the knowledge of gender roles and the evaluative assessments of performance in those roles. Participants tried to learn statements like “Jane is a good nurse” or “John is a bad nurse.” Memory for these relationships was then tested. Results indicated that when the person's name and the role were consistent with the gender stereotype, a positive evaluative connection made the statement easier to recall than a negative evaluative connection. However, an inconsistent name—role pairing was easier to recall when the evaluative connection was negative rather than positive. The results are interpreted as support for an evaluative bias that is part of the knowledge associated with gender differences.     

The importance to males and females of physical attractiveness,earning potential,and expressiveness in initial attraction

In an experimental study, male and female university students were asked to indicate how attracted they were to an opposite gender stimulus person after being presented information about the person's physical attractiveness, earning potential, and expressiveness. As hypothesized, subjects were more attracted to a physically attractive person than to a physically unattractive person, more attracted to a person with high earning potential than to a person with low earning potential, and more attracted to a high-expressive person than to a low-expressive person. Of these three characteristics, physical attractiveness had the greatest effect on attraction. Contrary to sex role stereotypes, males and females were similarly affected by these partner characteristics. Gender differences, however, did emerge in the subjects' estimates of the effects of these characteristics on their attraction. Consistent with sex role stereotypes, males placed greater emphasis than females on physical attractiveness, and females placed greater emphasis than males on earning potential and expressiveness. The discrepancy between the experimental results and the subjects' perceptions of how the factors affected their attraction were interpreted to indicate that people may not be aware of what attracts them to another and may use “implicit causal theories” provided by the culture to explain their attraction responses.     

L'influence de l'activation des rapports intersexes sur les choix en faveur de la famille,du travail,du bénévolat ou des loisirs personnels

The aim of this paper was to study how the activation of intersexes relations affected the choices of activities linked to “relational” or “market” individualism. Firstly, as in Marro's research (1998), stories were presented in which the protagonists, being female or male, for different reasons (personal, professional, etc.) must decide or not to modify the time allocation that they devote to various activities, such as family, work, leisure, or voluntary help. Next, the subjects had to point out which choice they would personally advise. In addition, an activation of intersexes relations was carried out. The results have shown: 1) that personal advice in favour of “relational” or “market” individualism are found in both sexes ; 2) that the activation of intersexes relations modified more personal advice of female subjects than of male subjects (then more oriented, to family and work for women, to leisure for men).     

A Confirmatory Factor Analytic Investigation of the TAS–20: Corroboration of a Five-Factor Model and Suggestions for Improvement

Two studies conducted around 1950 provided aggregate data on college students' attribution of characteristics to men or women (sex-role stereotype). Seeman (1950) provided data for three attributes clearly sex-role identified. Fernberger (1948) used a “story” with 16 blank spaces for response of “men” or “women” to assess sex-role stereotypes. Replications of these studies were conducted in undergraduate psychology classes during the 1970–71 school year to assess changes in sex-role stereotypes and in personal preferences. Results for stereotypes indicated either no change for the Seeman data or even more polarized stereotypes for the Fernberger data. No evidence for role convergence was found for stereotypes. Ss personal preferences were markedly discrepant from their stereotypic responses, as the literature would predict.     

Patterns of moral judgment derive from nonmoral psychological representations

Ordinary people often make moral judgments that are consistent with philosophical principles and legal distinctions. For example, they judge killing as worse than letting die, and harm caused as a necessary means to a greater good as worse than harm caused as a side‐effect ( Cushman, Young, & Hauser, 2006 ). Are these patterns of judgment produced by mechanisms specific to the moral domain, or do they derive from other psychological domains? We show that the action/omission and means/side‐effect distinctions affect nonmoral representations and provide evidence that their role in moral judgment is mediated by these nonmoral psychological representations. Specifically, the action/omission distinction affects moral judgment primarily via causal attribution, while the means/side‐effect distinction affects moral judgment via intentional attribution. We suggest that many of the specific patterns evident in our moral judgments in fact derive from nonmoral psychological mechanisms, and especially from the processes of causal and intentional attribution.     

How expert witnesses' counterfactuals influence causal and responsibility attributions of mock jurors and expert judges

Past research has shown that counterfactual (“If…then…”) thoughts influence causal and responsibility attribution in the judicial context. However, little is known on whether and how the use of counterfactuals in communication affects lay jurors' and judges' evaluations. In two studies, we asked mock lay jurors (Study 1) and actual judges (Study 2) to read a medical malpractice case followed by an expert witness report, which included counterfactuals focused on either the physician, the patient, or external factors. Results showed that counterfactual focus had a strong effect on both lay jurors' and judges' causal and responsibility attributions. Counterfactual focus also moderated the effect of outcome foreseeability on responsibility attribution. Discussion focuses on how counterfactual communication can direct causal and responsibility attribution and reduce the importance of other factors known to influence judicial decision‐making. The potential implications of these findings in training programs and debiasing interventions are also discussed.     

Emotion,core affect,and psychological construction

As an alternative to using the concepts of emotion, fear, anger, and the like as scientific tools, this article advocates an approach based on the concepts of core affect and psychological construction, expanding the domain of inquiry beyond “emotion”. Core affect is a neurophysiological state that underlies simply feeling good or bad, drowsy or energised. Psychological construction is not one process but an umbrella term for the various processes that produce: (a) a particular emotional episode's “components” (such as facial movement, vocal tone, peripheral nervous system change, appraisal, attribution, behaviour, subjective experience, and emotion regulation); (b) associations among the components; and (c) the categorisation of the pattern of components as a specific emotion.     

Client Gender and Sex Role: Predictors of Counselors' Impressions and Expectations

Researchers of this study questioned: Are clients (male or female) with self-reported “masculine” versus “feminine” role orientations viewed more favorably by counselors? Which is more predictive of the counselor's impressions: the client's gender or his or her sex role orientation? Results suggested that highly masculine and highly feminine clients (regardless of gender) are perceived as more socially skilled and likely to experience a positive therapeutic outcome. Gender did not uniquely predict counselors' impressions. Highly feminine women clients, however, were viewed as more socially skilled than were highly feminine men. On average, clients were viewed as friendly and submissive.     

Sex-role behavior and obedience to authority: A field study

Obedience by male and female subjects to male and female experimenters was investigated under various conditions of “perceived legitimacy.” The procedure involved an experimenter stopping a subject who was about to cross a street at a particular crosswalk, the subject was then instructed to cross at another designated location. The dependent variable was the level of obedience to these instructions. The four main factorial independent variables were the sex of the experimenter, the sex of the subject, and two conditions of “perceived legitimacy” (presence or absence of a “uniform,” presence or absence of an “explanation”). Significant results were obtained for the uniform and sex of subject main effects (more obedience with a uniform, more disobedience by females). Additional analyses indicated that “older” subjects disobeyed more often than “younger” ones, that “formally” dressed subjects disobeyed more often than “informally” dressed ones, and that ethnic minority group experimenters were disobeyed significantly more often than Caucasian experimenters. Significant interactions were also obtained, mainly due to the behavior of the younger men and the older women. Male and female experimenters were obeyed equally, in general. The results are discussed in relation to sex-role prejudice and discriminatory behavior.     

“Bad philosophy” and “derivative philosophy”: Labels that keep women out of the canon

Efforts to include women in the canon have long been beset by reactionary gatekeeping, typified by the charge “That's not philosophy.” That charge doesn't apply to early and mid-analytic female philosophers—Welby, Ladd-Franklin, Bryant, Jones, de Laguna, Stebbing, Ambrose, MacDonald—with job titles like lecturer in logic and professor of philosophy and publications in Mind, the Journal of Philosophy, and Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society. It's hopeless to dismiss their work as “not philosophy.” But comparable reactionary gatekeeping affects them, this paper argues, typified by the labels “bad philosophy” and “derivative philosophy.” Virtue and vice epistemology help explain why these women have been neglected and why their own approaches are epistemically virtuous. Their contemporaries and historians are deficient in scholarly virtues in labelling these women's work “bad” or derived from male mentors with no or specious justification. Their disparaged qualities—intellectual humility, modesty, critical self-reflection, disclosing biases—are often epistemic virtues.