Processing the information contained in another's behavior

This study investigates attributions based on behavior congruent with situational demands (in-role) and those based on behavior incongruent with situational demands (out-of-role). By analyzing these processes in terms of a Bayesian inference model, it was possible to determine (a) the diagnostic values observers intially assign to behaviors, (b) the actual informational impact of these behaviors, and (c) the degree of optimality in processing information contained therein. The main results can be summarized as follows: (1) The diagnostic value and actual informational impact of out-of-role behaviors were much higher than those of inrole behaviors. (2) Information about out-of-role behaviors was less optimally processed than information about in-role behaviors. (3) Observers assigned smaller diagnostic values to behaviors which were described in great detail than to behaviors which were described in summary statements. (4) Observers' attitudes influenced their initial beliefs about the actors but not the processing of new information about the actor. (5) The Bayesian inference model predicted observers' inferences reasonably well.     

The perception of sex-inconsistent behavior

Sex-role perceptions were approached from an out-of-role attributional framework, with the predictions that out-of-role behavior would be rated more extreme than in-role behavior on sex-role stereotype scales and that out-of-role behavior would be seen as more internally determined. One hundred and twenty male and female college students heard one of four tapes in which the two stimulus persons (SPs), male and female, behaved in sex-role consistent or inconsistent behavior using the dimension of dominance-submission (DM-DF, SM-SF, DM-SF, DF-SM). The DF, compared to the DM, was attributed more masculinity and less femininity. The DF's behavior, compared to the DM, was seen as originating more from internal than situational causes.     

Informational cues and attributions based on role behavior

A recent experiment by Messick and Reeder (Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 1972, 18, 482–491) attempted to extend Jones, Davis, and Gergen's (Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1961, 63, 302–310) classic finding that out-of-role behavior.is more informative for person perception than in-role behavior. It is argued, however, that this study confounded two variables, role performance and occupation. Evidence is presented that the occupation variable alone could have produced Messick and Reeder's results. Both variables seem to affect attributions. The importance of these findings for relating attribution theory and role theory is discussed.     

Sex differences in performance attribution and contingency judgment

In two studies, male and female subjects were given attribution measures before and after performance on a novel finger maze. Neither study revealed any sex differences in expectancy and anticipated attributions prior to maze performance. In Experiment 1, no sex differences in attributions were obtained regardless of whether the outcome was success or failure. In Experiment 2, where the outcome was made completely noncontingent on behavior, females had greater illusion of control as well as higher luck attribution. This paradoxical finding was interpreted as reflecting females' tendency to depend on external and internal attributions simultaneously.The data presented here are based on a larger research project on reinforcement contingencies and performance attributions supported by a research grant from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada.     

Evaluation as a function of correspondence and hedonic relevance

An experiment was conducted to test and refine some of the implications of Jones and Davis' (1965) model of the attribution process in person perception. Subjects read anecdotes about actors who performed either in-role (low correspondence) or out-of-role (high correspondence) behaviors which were positive, negative, or neutral in the subject's estimation (hedonic relevance). Respect and admiration for the actor were influenced by both hedonic relevance and correspondence (did the action reflect an inner attribute?), but liking and friendship were affected by hedonic relevance only. The implications for the evaluation process in person perception were discussed.     

Prosocial organizational behaviors: The roles of workplace justice,achievement striving,and pay satisfaction

In this research, the roles of workplace justice, achievement striving behavior and pay satisfaction were used to predict prosocial behaviors. A total of 354 individuals from a consumer products company provided data for this research. Results suggest that achievement striving accounted for unique variance in in-role behavior. Perceived fairness in skill-based pay's certification process showed positive associations with extra-role and in-role behaviors. In support of previous research, pay satisfaction also provided unique contribution to both extra-role and in-role behaviors.     

The process of sex attribution

Sex attribution is defined as any explanation of behavior that specifies sex of the performer as a causal agent. A method is described for assessing appropriate and inappropriate occasions for making sex attributions, and several hypotheses related to their occurrence are advanced. As predicted, sex attributions occurred most frequently when a person stated a preference that was “sex appropriate” on an empirical basis for someone of his/her sex. Consistent with claims of the Women's Movement, the findings indicate that men are more likely than women to make inappropriate sex attributions. Unexpectedly, however, this bias occurred only when men were judging the attitudes of other males.     

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.     

Sex differences in attributions for sex-typed tasks1

Recent studies have indicated that males make more egotistical attributions than females, that is, males make more internal attributions for success and more external attributions for failure than females do. These sex differences in attributions were examined in terms of male/female differences in expectancies for success and ego-involvement in the tasks. Male and female subjects succeeded or failed on a masculine or a feminine task. It was found that males made more egotistical attributions than females on the masculine task, but females made more egotistical attributions than males on the feminine task. A covariance analysis revealed that these sex differences in attributions could be explained in terms of the differences between the males and females in expectancy for success and in ego-involvement. Finally, it was found that ego-involvement was a more important determinant of egotisical attributions in the present study than was expectancy.     

Attribution and reconstructive memory

Two experiments were conducted to test the effects of making an attribution on later memory for the event that gave rise to the attribution. Subjects in Experiment 1 observed a scenario in which an actor's behavior was associated with high or low variance (distinctiveness) across situations, and high or low congruence (consensus) to the actions of others. Subjects either made attributions for the actor's behavior immediately following the scenario or not. One week later, subjects were asked to recall consensus and distinctiveness for the actor's original behavior. Subjects who made attributions were significantly better at estimating the high-high and low-low combinations of consensus and distinctiveness than were their no-attribution counterparts. It was suggested that making an attribution may allow for a reconstructed memory for the original event, but not enhance direct access to the original event information. A second experiment tested this concept further by having subjects view an edited version of the scenario in which either the distinctiveness or the consensus information was deleted and having subjects make attributions or not. One week later, subjects were asked to indicate their certainty that consensus and distinctiveness information was a part of the original scenario and to estimate the levels of consensus and distinctiveness. Subjects who made attributions were more confident and accurate in estimating the level of consensus or distinctiveness that was given in the original scenario than were no-attribution subjects. However, attribution subjects were also more confident that consensus information or distinctiveness information was contained in the scenario (when it was not) than were the noattributio subjects. Results of the two experiments suggest that eliciting attributions can distort subsequent memory for the event on which the attributions were based.     

Attributions of responsibility for date and stranger rape

This study examined the effects of the victim-perpetrator relationship on college students' attributions of responsibility for rape. In addition, the rape specificity of these attributions was investigated. College females and males read one of six scenarios that depicted a rape or a proposition, and that varied according to the victim-perpetrator relationship (steady dating partners/acquaintances on a first date/strangers). Then they rated seven responsibility attributions for the rape or proposition. Results indicated that most forms of victim responsibility were stronger for the rape and proposition on a date than for the incidents between strangers, and the findings concerning the perpetrator's responsibility were mixed. The pattern of both victim- and perpetrator-responsibility attributions suggests that both a rape and proposition on a date, compared to incidents between strangers, elicit stronger sex role and sexual attributions. Moreover, male subjects, in comparison to female subjects, gave higher ratings to several responsibility attributions, and these, also, are linked to sex role and sexual considerations. Further, the data revealed that only the perpetrator-responsibility attributions were stronger for the rape than the proposition.This research was supported by the University of Connecticut Research Foundation Grant No. 1171-000-22-00215-35-760. The authors thank Laurin Hafner for his help with the data analysis.     

Determinants of Relapse and the Rule Violation Effect in Predicting Safer Sex Goal Violations1

Knowledge of the determinants of lapses into unsafe sex are important parts of HIV prevention interventions. The present study examines the determinants of lapses into unsafe sex, and the role of attribution in predicting lapses into unsafe sex within an HIV prevention treatment program for homosexual men based on the relapse prevention (RP) model (Marlatt & Gordon, 1985). Self-reported negative emotional states and general urges to engage in sex were perceived to precede violations of safer sex goals. Stable and global attributions for a goal violation related to the probability of a second concurrently assessed violation. Prospective analyses indicated that future unprotected oral and anal sex was predicted by current unprotected oral and anal sex. In addition, more stable and external attributions for previous goal violations added to the prediction of future unprotected anal sex. Results are discussed in relation to the RP model, the role of attributions in safer sex goal violations, and treatments to reduce unsafe sexual behavior.     

Temporal effects on attributions for one's own behavior: The role of task outcome

Previous investigations into how attributions for one's own behavior change over time have resulted in surprisingly inconsistent results. Two experiments were conducted to account for these discrepant findings. In Experiment 1 male undergraduates were given feedback indicating that they had done either well or poorly on a skill-assessment test. Half of the subjects believed they were being videotaped when performing the test, half did not. In addition, half of the subjects completed attribution questionnaires immediately after the feedback, whereas half completed the questionnaires 2 or 3 days later. It was found that subjects who felt they had succeeded on the task made attributions that were more dispositional over time and subjects who felt they had failed made attributions that were more situational over time. No effect for the videotape manipulation was found. Experiment 2 replicated the task outcome effect and provided evidence suggesting that the effect was caused by a selective forgetting of unflattering attributions.     

Self-behavior focus of attention as a determinant of children's and adults' attributions to stories with negative outcomes

This study explored characteristics of attributions made to negative outcome stories by fourth-, sixth-, and eighth-graders as well as college students. All subjects read six stories representing three stories for each of two levels (self-focus and behavior-focus) of a within-subjects factor, Focus of Attention. Dependent measures included both spontaneous attributions and structured evaluations on the dimensions of causality, responsibility, blame, and deservingness. Analyses of the spontaneous attributions indicated that Self attributions were more frequently given than either Behavior or External attributions to both self- and behavior-focus stories. The experimental manipulation of internal focus produced matching attributions only in the self manipulation. Analyses of the structured evaluations indicated that subjects used Cause and Responsibility interchangeably but only eighth-graders and college students differentiated Cause/Responsibility from both Blame and Deservingness. Cause/Responsibility was also shown to have more salience in the behavior-than self-focus stories. It is suggested that a verbal focus on behavior has limited effects in producing defensive, self-distanced attributions but may heighten evaluations of Cause/Responsibility. In addition, behavior-focus seems to have little effect on the development of the psychologically more complex evaluations of blame and deservingness.     

Whites' ethnocentrism and their attributions for the behavior of blacks: A motivational bias1

Previous research has shown that people make more derogatory attributions for the behavior of outgroup members than for the behavior of ingroup members. However, these results may be due merely to a cultural stereotype of the outgroup rather than to ethnocentrism (which would entail dislike for members of the outgroup). To examine the effect of ethnocentrism on attributions, irrespective of the cultural stereotype, and to examine whether people who differ in ethnocentrism also differ in their attributions for whites and blacks, high and low ethnocentric whites made attributions for the success and failure of black and white actors on a task which required an ability that was outside the scope of the cultural stereotype of blacks, i.e., ESP ability. Examination of these attributions revealed that the more ethnocentric the subjects were, the more they tended to give whites greater credit for success than blacks, and the more they tended to give whites less blame for failure than blacks. These results were discussed in terms of their implications for the persistence of prejudice and for the effects of motivations on attributions for the behavior of others.     

Sex stereotypes and responses to juvenile delinquency

On the basis of our current knowledge of sex stereotypes and their influence on judgments about women and men, two conflicting hypotheses about reactions to delinquent behavior by men and women, or by boys and girls, can be put forward. First, because crime is mainly masculine, responsibility for criminal behavior will be more strongly attributed to a boy's nature than to a girl's, thereby leading to more severe punishment for boys. Second, deviations from a stereotype lead to negative evaluations, and thus should lead to harsher punishment for girls. The first study described, based on a field experiment with 709 adolescent and 403 adult subjects, was conducted to determine whether different sanctions were applied to boys and girls who engaged in identical delinquent behavior. The results show that for boys, more severe punishment was preferred for aggressive behavior, and for girls, more punishment for noncriminal delinquent behavior. In a second study (N=43), it was hypothesized that these differences in sanctioning corresponded with the degree of perceived masculinity of the delinquent behavior. This hypothesis was confirmed. A model shows how sex stereotypes about delinquent behavior lead to sex-related difference in attributions, which in turn lead to differences in punishment.     

The relationship between the three components of commitment and employee performance in China

This study examined the relationship between the three components of organizational commitment and performance, defined as in-role performance and organizational citizenship behavior (OCB), using a sample of 253 supervisor-subordinate dyads from the People’s Republic of China. Results showed that affective commitment (AC) related positively to in-role performance and OCB, while continuance commitment (CC) was not associated with in-role performance but negatively correlated with OCB. In addition, normative commitment (NC) moderated the relationship between AC and in-role performance as well as OCB. The linear relationship between AC and in-role performance/OCB was stronger for those with lower NC. Limitations of the study, directions for future research, and implications of the findings are discussed.     

Violate my beliefs? Then you're to blame! Belief content as an explanation for causal attribution biases

We examined the extent to which the content of beliefs about appropriate behavior in social situations influences blame attributions for negative outcomes in relationship situations. Young, middle-aged, and older adults indicated their level of agreement to a set of traditional and nontraditional beliefs. Five months later, we assessed the degree to which these same individuals blamed traditional and nontraditional characters who violated their beliefs in 12 social conflict situations. Older adults held more traditional beliefs regarding appropriate relationship behaviors (e.g., the acceptability of premarital sex). Individual differences in the content of one's beliefs were needed to understand age-related patterns in blame attributions; for example, adherence to traditional beliefs about appropriate relationship behaviors led to higher responsibility and blame attributions toward characters behaving in ways that were inconsistent with these beliefs. Structural regression models showed that beliefs fully mediated the effects of working memory and need for closure on causal attributions and partially mediated the effects of age and religiosity on attributions. Personal identification with the characters had additional, independent effects on attributions. Findings are discussed from the theoretical perspective of a belief-based explanation of social judgment biases.