Metaphor and readers’ attributions of intimacy

Previous theorists have suggested that figurative language may be an especially salient means by which speakers and addressees establish and recognize specific feelings of interpersonal closeness. To explore readers' sensitivity to this interpersonal function of figurative language use, brief stories were created that described interactions between two ambiguously related characters. In the course of these conversational narratives, one character always used either a metaphoric or literal referring expression to refer to some antecedent information from the story. Across three experiments, readers consistently judged these story characters as knowing each other better when their interactions contained metaphoric references. Moreover, this occurred even when addressees failed to give explicit evidence of having understood the critical expressions. To the extent that language use highlights assumptions about commonalities, readers may generate inferences about social relationships alongside more meaning-driven comprehension processes.     

Can intergroup contact improve humanity attributions?

In this paper, intergroup contact was evaluated as a strategy to favor outgroup humanization. We tested a double‐mediation model, in which contact is associated with both decreased salience of intergroup boundaries and the adoption of a common identity. These recategorizations, in turn, are related to lower levels of anxiety and higher levels of empathy, both emotions being proximal predictors of outgroup humanization. The model was tested using structural equation modeling in the context of different intergroup relations: Italians versus immigrants (Study 1); Northern Italians versus Southern Italians (Study 2). Supporting the hypotheses, group representations and emotions mediated the relationship between contact and humanity attributions. The practical implications of results are discussed.     

Can we modify maladaptive attributions for fatigue?

Research has shown that those with insomnia focus primarily on their sleep as a cause of daytime fatigue rather than the multitude of other possible causes of fatigue. This can create sleep-related anxiety and further perpetuate the sleep disturbance. In order to lessen the increased focus on sleep, the present study investigated whether people could learn to consider other attributions for fatigue via an information-based manipulation. Undergraduate students (N = 88) were randomized to two information groups: They either received information about common factors that could explain daytime fatigue (the fatigue information condition) or received generic sleep-related information (the control condition). Each group was tested pre- and post-intervention. Fatigue information participants were significantly more likely to consider non-sleep-related attributions for fatigue at post-intervention, relative to control participants. These results demonstrate that attributions for fatigue may be amenable to change via an information-based intervention; thus, this research explores a preliminary step toward investigating refinements to insomnia treatments.     

Individual differences for sex differences in achievement attributions?

Past research has found a self-defensive bias in males and a self-derogatory bias in female achievement attributions. Dispositional explanations for these differences were examined in the present study. Subjects completed measures of Need for Achievement, Self-Esteem, Fear of Success, Attitudes Toward Women, and Androgyny. They later competed in same- or mixed-sex pairs on an anagram task which was prearranged in difficulty so that one subject clearly defeated his/her partner. Consistent with past research, males were more likely to attribute their outcomes to ability, and less likely to attribute their outcomes to effort and luck, than were females. Achievement motivation was the most consistently successful predictor of these sex differences.     

Praise or blame? Affective influences on attributions for achievement

Three experiments showed that mood influences achievement attributions and that cognitive processes underlie these effects. In Experiment 1, happy Ss made more internal and stable attributions for success than failure in typical 'life dilemmas'. In Experiment 2, attributions for real-life exam performance were more internal and stable in a happy than in a sad mood. Dysphoric moods resulted in self-critical rather than self-enhancing attributions, contrary to motivational theories, but consistent with cognitive models and the clinical literature on depression. In Experiment 3 this pattern was repeated with direct self vs. other comparisons, and for self-efficacy judgements. The results are interpreted as supporting cognitive rather than motivational theories of attribution biases. The implications of the results for clinical research, and contemporary affect-cognition theories are considered.     

Do dispositional attributions regarding peer endorsers influence product evaluations?

The effect of a peer endorsement advertisement on research participants' attitudes toward the advertised product was examined. An advertisement for a Seiko watch and a questionnaire were administered to participants. The degree of dispositional attributions regarding the endorser's motivation and participants' subsequent attitudes associated with the Seiko watch were measured. In addition, other factors that might affect product evaluation were measured. Whether product evaluation could be accounted for by correspondence bias was investigated. The results showed that the degree of dispositional attributions correlated with product evaluations. There was no correspondence bias. Possible causes for the lack of correspondence bias are discussed and a model suggesting factors accounting for participants' product evaluations is presented.     

Friendly or just polite? The effect of self-esteem on attributions

Studied the effect of a person's self-esteem on his inferences about another person's feelings toward him. Fifty-six mule and female college student subjects of high or low chronic self-esteem (median split; modified version of Janis and Field's ‘Feelings of Inadequacy Scale’) received either a negative or a positive evaluation of themselves. They were told that the evaluation had been written by another subject who had acted either under ‘sincere’ instructions, which allowed him to give his own opinion, or under ‘role-playing’ instructions, which assigned him to write either a positive or a negative evaluation. The subject's take was to decide under which instruction his evaluation had been written. It was predicted from a self-concistency logic that low self-esteem subjects would attribute negative evaluations to ‘sincere’ and positive evaluations to ‘role-playing’ instructions, while high self-esteem subjects would make the reverse attributions. A significant self-esteem × evaluation positivity interaction (p <.01) supported this prediction.     

What triggers causal attributions? The impact of valence and subjective probability

Various field studies and experimental simulations demonstrated that causal reasoning increases after unexpected as well as after unpleasant events. However, unpleasant events are seen as less likely than pleasant ones in everyday life. Accordingly, the subjective probability of the event and its hedonic quality were naturally confounded in these studies. To isolate the contribution of both determinants, the subjective probability and the valence of an event were independently manipulated in a laboratory experiment. Subjects completed an ostensible ‘professional skills test’ and received either success or failure feedback in relation to a criterion set by the experimenter. The subjective probability of success was varied by informing subjects about the distribution of success and failure in a comparable population (either 23 per cent or 77 per cent were said to meet the criterion). The results indicate a pronounced valence effect: The intensity of causal reasoning and the number of possible reasons reported for the outcome was greater after negative than after positive feedback, independent of the a priori probability of the outcome. No evidence for an increase in causal explanations after unexpected, as compared to expected, events was obtained. Several mediating processes are discussed.     

Les soignants face au burnout : quelles attributions causales ?

The objective of this study was to investigate the nature of the explanations produced by nurses when they are questioned about professional situations related with professional exhaustion such as burnout (BO), independently of a real-life situation of BO. The analysis of the 30 nurses’ adherences to causal explanations scale constructed and validated for this purpose showed greater adherence to internal causal explanations, both controllable and non-controllable, as explanations under external causalities, whatever the professional situation mentioned. The discussion focuses on the relevance of a psychosocial approach of explanations of the BO situations and its implications in terms of primary prevention of psychosocial risks in occupational context.     

Do attributions mediate the association between attachment and negative couple communication?

This study explored whether attributions for negative partner behavior mediate the association between insecure attachment and negative couple communication, using both self‐report and observational data. A sample of 59 married and cohabiting Australian couples completed self‐report measures of attachment, attributions, and communication; were videotaped participating in two 10‐min problem‐solving discussions; and were assessed on their attributions during the discussions using video‐mediated recall. Multilevel modeling found that female attachment insecurity was the most consistent predictor of self‐reported and observed couple communication, and negative attributions mediated the association between attachment and self‐reported couple communication. These findings suggested that attachment insecurity increased the likelihood that negative attributions were generated, which, in some cases, then influenced the style of communication each partner reported.     

What teacher factors influence their attributions for children's difficulties in learning?

Background Identifying the factors that influence teacher beliefs about teaching children with learning difficulties is important for the success of inclusive education. This study explores the relationship between teachers' role, self‐efficacy, attitudes towards disabled people, teaching experience and training, on teachers' attributions for children's difficulties in learning. Method One hundred and eighteen primary school teachers (44 general mainstream, 33 mainstream learning support, and 41 special education teachers) completed the short form of the Teachers' Sense of Efficacy Scale, the Interaction with Disabled Persons Scale (IDP), and a revised version of the Teacher Attribution Scale. Results Regression analysis found that teachers' role influenced stability and controllability attributions. However, for stability attributions the effect was not sustained when examined in the context of the other factors of teaching efficacy, experience, training, and attitudes towards disability. What emerged as important instead was strong feelings of sympathy towards disabled people which predicted stable attributions about learning difficulties. Experience of teaching children with additional support needs and teaching efficacy positively predicted external locus of causality attributions. Surprisingly, training was not found to have an impact on attributions. A mixed MANOVA found that mainstream teachers' controllability attributions were influenced by whether or not the child had identified learning support needs. Conclusions Teacher efficacy, experience of teaching students with support needs, attitudes towards disabled people, and teachers' role all impact on teacher attributions, but no relationship with training was found. Implications for teacher training and development, and for student achievement and student self‐perception are discussed.     

Depressive attributions: selection of different causes or assignment of dimensional meanings?

Attributional models of depression suggest that depression is associated with internal, stable, and global causal explanations of events. However, the models do not specify whether the depressive attributional process involves the selection of certain causes, the assignment of dimensional meanings to those causes, or both. A distinction between these two processes was suggested by the findings that the choice of causes does not reliably indicate the perceived dimensions and that there is poor convergence between existing methods that assess causes and those that assess dimensions. When causes and dimensions were each measured in a manner that avoided confounding by the other, each made a unique contribution to the prediction of depression scores. Cause ratings alone were significantly associated with depression scores, but the optimal prediction of depression included both causes and dimensions. The implications of the distinction between these two processes for experimental manipulations of attributions and for reattribution training programs are discussed.     

Who's to blame? Narcissism and self‐serving attributions following feedback

The study examined the relationship between narcissism, performance attributions, and negative emotions following success or failure. As expected, narcissistic individuals showed more self‐serving attributions for their performance in an intelligence test than less narcissistic individuals: compared with less narcissistic individuals, narcissists revealed a stronger tendency to attribute success to ability and failure to task difficulty. In contrast to this, less narcissistic participants tended to show the opposite pattern by ascribing failure, but not success, to their ability. Additionally, anger and depression could be predicted by an interaction of performance feedback and performance attributions. Mediation analyses revealed that the attribution dimensions ‘task difficulty’ and ‘ability’ mediated the effect of narcissism on anger and depression following failure feedback. The results provide support for the theoretical assumption that attributional processes might, at least to some extent, explain the often reported relation between narcissism and negative emotions following failure. Copyright © 2003 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

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.     

Children's hostile intent attributions and emotional distress: What do parents perceive?

Traditionally, assessments of social information processing and associated emotional distress have used children's self‐reports. We posit that additional informants, such as parents, may help illuminate the association between these variables and aggression. Our sample was composed of 222 dual‐parent families of fourth‐grade children (103 boys; 119 girls). Children responded to instrumental and relational provocations and their parents read the same scenarios and responded the way they believed their child would. Peer nominations provided aggression scores. We explored how means differed by provocation type (relational vs. instrumental), informant (mother, father, and child), and gender of child. The results also suggest that parent perceptions may effectively predict children's participation in relational and physical aggression, above and beyond the child's self‐reports.

     

Who's to blame? The role of power and attributions in susceptibility to match-fixing

ObjectiveOfficial reports and anecdotal evidence suggest that people with power frequently put pressure on athletes to fix a match. Therefore, it is assumed that athletes may attribute their involvement to this pressure. The present study was designed to investigate the role that power, attributions and moral emotions may play in the decision to fix a match.MethodTeam and individual sport athletes (N = 427) competing in five European countries participated in a quasi-experimental vignette design. Participants completed eight vignettes manipulating power, source of attributions and stability of attributions. Match-fixing susceptibility and five discrete anticipated moral emotions (guilt, shame, pride, indifference, anger) were measured.ResultsThe results of the analyses demonstrated that athletes are perceived to be most susceptible to match-fixing when the reason is related to a stable attribute of the individual (e.g., enjoying gambling, having a betting problem). However, participants reported also being susceptible to match-fixing when power is high. Anticipated emotions negatively predicted match-fixing susceptibility and mediated the effect of attributions and power on match-fixing susceptibility.ConclusionThe findings provide information on the interplay between attributions, power and anticipated emotions in predicting match-fixing susceptibility, and the determinants of match-fixing susceptibility. This will be of benefit to policy makers, sporting organizations and researchers in developing policies and interventions to protect athletes from being vulnerable to match-fixing requests.