An intrasubject approach to causal attribution

The present investigation draws on the judgment research tradition in order to examine the causal attributions made by individual subjects in an often used attribution task. Formal empirical tests of Kelley's (1967) attribution theory have demonstrated that attributions are influenced by the interaction of consensus, distinctiveness, and consistency information. None of these studies, however, have separately examined attributions made by individual judges. Implicit assumptions about individual differences, for example, have been made by the template-matching model of causal attribution (Orvis, Cunningham, & Kelley, 1975) but have not been scrutinized at the intrasubject level. Log linear modeling of attributions in the present research showed that while subjects were influenced by the causal information in the task, the relation between this information and attributions was more importantly characterized by individual differences than by uniform patterning. The nature of these individual differences and the significance of an idiographic approach to causal analysis are discussed.     

The Analysis of Verbal Explanations for Marital Separation: Implications for Attribution Theory1

The main purpose of this study was to analyze the structure and content of real-life attributions, using these data to examine some important theoretical and empirical issues in attribution theory. The causal attributions examined came from free-response verbal protocols of explanations for marital separation of 29 males and 33 females living in New Zealand. Respondents gave causal importance weghts to the attributions from their verbal protocols, utilizing the technique of subjective magnitude estimation. Ipsative data, representing perceived causal responsibility for different attribution targets (self, ex-spouse, external factors, etc.), were derived from these weights, and the impact a range of independent variables exerted on these derived free-response attribution percentages was examined. Evidence is presented which supports the validity and reliability of this technique. The normative data gathered was found to be both consistent and inconsistent with different aspects of attribution theory. The implications for attribution theory are discussed.     

Entrepreneurial Passion: A Review,Synthesis, and Agenda for Future Research

The present study undertakes a comprehensive and critical review of the body of empirical work on entrepreneurial passion. In particular, we document how the “first generation” of research on entrepreneurial passion and work passion in entrepreneurs has gained growing attention in various sub-fields of entrepreneurship research including entrepreneurial management, psychology, and finance. We provide an overview over theories used, definitions and measurements adopted, research methods utilized (e.g., qualitative vs. quantitative, survey-based vs. experimental/intervention), the thematic focus of studies, and unit of investigation (e.g., individual vs. team). We not only flag the problems of inconsistencies and limitations with respect to theory use, the making of causal inferences, and the conceptualization and measurement of entrepreneurial passion in existing studies (e.g., jingle fallacies), but also review the antecedents and outcomes of entrepreneurial passion identified in prior work and work where it had been examined as a moderator. Following this, we offer a research agenda with concrete suggestions to act as a foundation for the “second generation” of entrepreneurial passion research that proactively addresses the issues and gaps identified in our review. Finally, we also highlight how insights from the entrepreneurial passion literature can inform scholarship on passion more broadly.     

When Social Outcomes Aren′t Fair: The Effect of Causal Attributions on Preferences

Building upon recent models of social utility theory, this paper outlines a theoretical framework for examining the effect of causal attributions on choice in social decision making. The results of three empirical studies are reported, which identify two dimensions of external attribution that affect how individuals weight absolute versus comparative payoffs. These dimensions are whether the causal agent is perceived to be human versus non-human (e.g., an act of nature) and the degree to which human agents are perceived to have an interest in the outcome of the decision. Together, these findings have implications for social welfare policies, dispute resolution, and game theoretic models.     

Human agency and associative learning: Pavlovian principles govern social process in causal relationship detection

Estimates of a worker's causal relationship (CR) to production obeyed associative principles, despite the participants' a priori beliefs that workers are responsible or "at cause" for production. In three experiments, social analogues of conditioned stimuli (workers) and unconditioned stimuli (company production information) were manipulated in familiar Pavlovian paradigms. The findings included (1) CR acquisition, (2) unconditioned stimulus-intensity effects, and (3) CR blocking. The research plan employed an approach that Neal Miller (1959) termed "extension of liberalized S-R theory" and drew on the Rescorla-Wagner model to integrate the experimental results, to illuminate the empirical data of social attribution research, and to guide the study of causal relationship detection using social stimuli.     

A Bayesian Theory of Sequential Causal Learning and Abstract Transfer

Two key research issues in the field of causal learning are how people acquire causal knowledge when observing data that are presented sequentially, and the level of abstraction at which learning takes place. Does sequential causal learning solely involve the acquisition of specific cause‐effect links, or do learners also acquire knowledge about abstract causal constraints? Recent empirical studies have revealed that experience with one set of causal cues can dramatically alter subsequent learning and performance with entirely different cues, suggesting that learning involves abstract transfer, and such transfer effects involve sequential presentation of distinct sets of causal cues. It has been demonstrated that pre‐training (or even post‐training) can modulate classic causal learning phenomena such as forward and backward blocking. To account for these effects, we propose a Bayesian theory of sequential causal learning. The theory assumes that humans are able to consider and use several alternative causal generative models, each instantiating a different causal integration rule. Model selection is used to decide which integration rule to use in a given learning environment in order to infer causal knowledge from sequential data. Detailed computer simulations demonstrate that humans rely on the abstract characteristics of outcome variables (e.g., binary vs. continuous) to select a causal integration rule, which in turn alters causal learning in a variety of blocking and overshadowing paradigms. When the nature of the outcome variable is ambiguous, humans select the model that yields the best fit with the recent environment, and then apply it to subsequent learning tasks. Based on sequential patterns of cue‐outcome co‐occurrence, the theory can account for a range of phenomena in sequential causal learning, including various blocking effects, primacy effects in some experimental conditions, and apparently abstract transfer of causal knowledge.     

An attributional analysis of social-comparison jealousy

Five studies tested Weiner's attributional theory (Weiner, 1985) in relation to the arousal of social-comparison jealousy. Studies 1 and 2 assessed the association between causal attribution and the arousal of jealousy in social comparison episodes via a critical incident technique. Studies 3 and 4 assessed the arousal of jealousy as a function of the causal structure of a social-comparison episode. Study 5 assessed that relationship in interaction with another antecedent of jealousy (i.e., self-relevance of the domain). Results showed that the attribution of personal failure to internal factors promoted more jealousy than an external attribution. The findings also indicated that both causal attribution and jealousy were associated with the threat to self-esteem people experienced in the comparison episode. Finally, the findings showed that internal attribution affected jealousy independently from the self-relevance of the domain. Results are discussed in terms of Weiner's attributional theory and Tesser's self-evaluation maintenance model.     

Theory-based bias correction in dispositional inference: The fundamental attribution error is dead,long live the correspondence bias

Social psychological research has repeatedly shown that perceivers draw correspondent dispositional inferences from observed behaviour even when this behaviour was highly constrained by situational factors (i.e., the correspondence bias). Even though this phenomenon has been proposed to be multiply determined, the most common explanation is still that perceivers ubiquitously consider situational factors to have little impact on human behaviour (i.e., the fundamental attribution error). The present chapter offers a critical analysis of the available empirical evidence on the correspondence bias from the perspective of theory-based bias correction. It is concluded that the correspondence bias results from a number of different processes associated with the application of perceivers' causal theories about situational influences on human behaviour. However, there is no evidence for the assumption that the correspondence bias is due to causal theories implying that situational factors have little impact on human behaviour. Theoretical and empirical implications are discussed.     

Does the distinction between causal and moral responsibility really salvage the defensive attribution hypothesis?: A critique of Nogami and Streufert's thesis

Nogami and Streufert's (1983) thesis, that the distinction between causal and moral responsibility accounts for contradictory data in the defensive attribution literature, is criticized on empirical and conceptual grounds. It is argued that the results reported may be idiosyncratic to their study given the procedures they used. Moreover, close examination reveals several problems in using their results to account for previous contradictory research findings.     

Exploring sex differences in expectancy,attribution, and academic achievement

Two studies were carried out to explore if sex differences in expectancy and attribution of achievement are related to sex differences in academic performance. Study I investigated expectancy and attribution of achievement, operationalized as grade point index, among 176 male and 116 female college freshmen. Men were found to form higher expectations for future grades. Attributions measured through assigning percentage weights to ability, luck, effort, and difficulty as causal explanations of one's grade point index showed that men make more ability and women more effort attributions. Despite these differences in expectancy and attribution patterns, men and women were found not to differ in their performance. In Study II 120 college freshmen, half of them male, half female, filled out questionnaires before and after a midterm examination. A subsample of 49 also completed the Bem Sex Role Inventory. The results basically confirm the previous study's findings, except in Study II, men and women gave equally high weights to effort as a cause. The results also show that a feminine sex-role orientation is associated with a debilitating pattern of expectancy and attribution and lower performance, especially among women. Implications of the results for unraveling inconsistencies in the attribution literature and for a need to clarify connotations of femininity are discussed.The author wishes to express her gratitude to the members of the Psychology and Guidance Division of the College of Basic Studies, Boston University, for their assistance in preparing the questionnaire and collecting the data for Study I. Research for Study II was supported by grant MH 31181-01 from the National Institute of Mental Health. Mark Nachbar provided assistance in analyzing the data to both studies. Jan Mokros, Joseph Pleck, and Dan Jaquette provided valuable comments on an earlier version of this article.     

Causal attribution,coping strategies,and combat-related post-traumatic stress disorder

The present study assesses the intervening role of ways of coping in mediating the effects of causal attribution for negative events on combat-related post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). The sample consisted of Israeli soldiers who suffered a combat stress reaction episode during the 1982 Lebanon War and were followed 2 and 3 years after their participation in combat. The results showed that an attribution of negative events to stable and uncontrollable causes was associated with both a more frequent use of emotion-focused coping and a less frequent use of problem-focused coping. It was also found that emotion-focused coping and problem-focused coping were more direct antecedents of combat-related PTSD than causal attribution. Finally, it was found that the association between causal attribution and combat-related PTSD was mediated by variations in emotion-focused coping. The discussion attempts to integrate theoretical notions derived from attributional models and Lazarus and Folkman's stress-coping model.     

Towards a cognitive theory of existential meaning

The capacity to attribute meaning to personal experiences may rest on a specialized cognitive system enabling this form of causal reasoning. Close examination of these attributional tendencies suggests that this system may be distinct from those underlying other forms of causal reasoning such as a “theory of mind” system in the behavioral domain, a folk physics system in the physical domain, and a folk biology system in the biological domain. A fourth, existential domain, an abstract ontological frame within which the subjective, narrative self is envisioned to be contained, may have driven the construction of an intuitive capacity in humans that encourages them to search for the underlying purpose or reason for having had certain life experiences. This system likely has specific, definable operational rules that are responsible for activating such explanatory searches. In addition, it appears anchored to a general intentionality system that promotes the attribution of teleological purpose and higher-order mental states to an abstract agency that is envisioned to cause events and personal experiences. Identifying the component parts of this specialized cognitive system through empirical investigations can help researchers to reconstruct both its evolutionary phylogeny and to track its developmental emergence.     

Attribution of success and failure revisited, or: The motivational bias is alive and well in attribution theory

Do causal attributions serve the need to protect and / or enhance self-esteem? In a recent review, Miller and Ross (1975) proposed that there is evidence for self-serving effect in the attribution of success but not in the attribution of failure; and that this effect reflects biases in information-processing rather than self-esteem maintenance. The present review indicated that self-serving effects for both success and failure are obtained in most but not all experimental paradigms. Processes which may suppress or even reverse the self-serving effect were discussed. Most important, the examination of research in which self-serving effects are obtained suggested that these attributions are better understood in motivational than in information-processing terms.     

An Attributional Analysis of Reactions to Magic Johnson1

Principles from attribution theory were used to analyze public reactions to the health status of Magic Johnson. An experimental study containing two distinct samples (college students and African-American adults) together with supplemental reports from local and national media confirm the value of this approach. The findings show that inferences about causal responsibility are related to affective reactions of sympathy and anger toward Magic Johnson. Implications for attribution theory, as well as for future attitudes toward Magic Johnson, are discussed.     

Effects of Question-Wording Style and Research Context on Attributions for Success and Failure

Although a substantial body of research exists concerning the patterns of causal attributions that are made to explain achievement outcomes, relatively little attention has been paid to the effects that measurement techniques have on the attributions they elicit. Two methodological factors—question-wording style and research context—were hypothesized to affect the results of attribution studies. Participants made informational (e.g., "How hard did you try?") and causal (e.g., "To what extent was effort a cause of your outcome?") attributions to outcomes in either an experimental (anagram-task) or natural (classroom-examination) research context. Significant outcome effects were found for (a) informational but not causal attributions to ability and to the task and for (b) attributions to ability in the natural but not in the experimental context. The implications of these findings for attribution theory and research are discussed.     

Career self-efficacy: Empirical status and future directions

Bandura's self-efficacy theory, stemming from a social cognitive model of behavior, has been gaining empirical attention in the career literature. This paper reviews emerging findings applying self-efficacy theory to career-relevant behaviors; examines a number of conceptual and methodological issues arising from this work; and offers several directions for future research and theory on the career self-efficacy construct. Self-efficacy appears to offer promise in understanding certain career entry behaviors, such as college major choices and academic performance, though there has been little work relating self-efficacy to career development beyond college or exploring causal connections between self-efficacy and career behaviors. An expanded base for research on career self-efficacy is advocated.     

Why and How to Learn Why: Analysis-based Generalization of Procedures

Max Wertheimer, in his classic Productive Thinking, linked understanding to transfer: Understanding is important because it provides the ability to generalize the solution of one problem to apply to another. Recent work in human and machine learning has led to the development of a new class of generalization mechanism, called here analysis-based generalization, which can be used to provide a concrete account of the linkage Wertheimer suggested: these mechanisms all, in different ways, use understanding of examples in the generalization process. In this paper I review this class of mechanism, and describe a method for causal attribution that can produce the analyses of examples that the generalization methods require, in the domain of simple procedures in human-computer interaction. This causal analysis method is linked with analysis-based generalization to form EXPL, an implemented model which is a concrete, though limited, instontiation of Wertheimer s scheme. EXPL constructs an understanding of an example procedure and generalizes it on the basis of that understanding. Results of an empirical study suggest that some of EXPL's attribution heuristics are used by people, and that while a subclass of analysis-based methods, called superstitious methods, seem to provide a more plausible account of people's generalization under the conditions of the study than a contrasting class of rationalistic methods, at least some participants appear to use methods from both classes. The results also show that explanation-based methods, which rely on comprehensive domain theories, must be used in conjunction with a means for extending the domain theory. If thus enhanced, explanation-based methods are able to mimic the effects of other analysis-based methods, and can provide a good account of the data, though combinations of other methods must also be considered. Finally, I return to Wertheimer s ideas to argue that none of the current analysis-based generalization methods fully captures Wertheimer s notion of understanding. Proper choice among different possible analyses of an example is crucial for Wertheimer, but I argue that this problem may be beyond the reach of learning systems.     

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.     

权力对基本归因错误的影响

归因对理解和预测环境有着重要作用。归因的两阶段过程理论认为,自动化加工会衍生内归因,进一步的控制化加工才会导致外归因。社会权力会提升自动化加工倾向,因此,社会权力可能会提升基本归因错误的发生。通过四个研究,对此进行验证。研究1-3通过问卷测量,以特质性权力感作为社会权力的指标,其中研究1通过情境判断测验对基本归因错误进行测量,研究2-3采用自陈量表对基本归因错误进行测量,并对社会经济地位进行了控制。研究4则采用启动的方法启动临时性社会权力,探求社会权力与基本归因错误之间的因果关系。四个研究均得出了一致的结论：高社会权力个体更倾向于内归因。     

A test of the joint model of causal attribution

The joint model integrates Mill's methods of difference and agreement for making causal attributions, and introduces a novel type of context attributions which reflect the opposite categories of the standard attribution responses provided in previous covariation research external versus the person, general versus the stimulus, and stable versus the occasion). The joint model predicts that attributions to standard causes require Mill's method of difference and that attributions to context causes require Mill's method of agreement. Two empirical studies demonstrated that the joint model fitted adequately with all of subject's standard and context attribution responses, in contrast to earlier theorizing and data involving only the method of difference (cf. Cheng & Novick, 1990) or only the method of agreement (cf. Hilton, Smith & Kim, 1995) which received less empirical support. © 1997 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.