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 effects of choice and source of constraint on children's attributions of preference

One hundred and twenty female children (40 each from the first, third, and sixth grades) were presented with videotaped presentations of a female child choosing between two toys. Depending upon condition, subjects then viewed the actor either playing with her initially preferred toy (Unconstrained choice) or being forced to play with her initially non-preferred toy (Constrained choice). Additionally, the source of the actor's freedom or constraint was represented as either adult mediated or environmentally mediated. All subjects rated the actor's liking for each of the toys, how much the actor wanted to play with each toy, and which toy the actor would choose to take home with her. The two major findings which emerged were: (1) Contrary to prediction, children of all three age levels tended to use cues reflecting both the actor's choice and the actor's behavior in inferring her liking for each of the toys. (2) As predicted, the degree to which observers' attributions of toy liking corresponded to inferred attitude of the adult (who either approved or prohibited the actor's choice) was an inverse function of age. The similarities between the findings of this study and the data from studies of adult attitude attribution and children's moral attributions are considered in the discussion.     

Attributed intentions and informational selectivity

Three experiments tested the hypothesis that ascribing a specific intention to an actor prior to witnessing his behavior leads an observer to preferentially recall action bearing on the intention. In each case, subjects were exposed to an action sequence which mixed elements appropriate to more than one intention. Recall of action was compared among different observers who were led to attribute different intentions to the same actors. Selective remembering favoring intent-relevant action is demonstrated in all three studies. The second experiment offers evidence that selectivity operates during observation of an actor rather than retrospectively. The third experiment suggests that attributions about intentions are more potent determiners of such selectivity than are characteristics of an actor related to his behavior but not bearing on his intention and indicates that observer characteristics interact with attributed intentions to determine recall. Interpretation of the findings suggests that accurate attribution of intentions can facilitate social exchange by attuning partners to the planned aspects of each other's behavior, while misapprehension of intentions can preclude coordinated interaction by misdirecting attention to irrelevant action or to responses coerced by the observer.     

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.     

Inferential processes in the forced compliance situation: A Bayesian analysis

The attribution made by an observer (O) to an actor in the forced compliance situation was regarded as a probability revision process which can be described by a Bayesian inference model. Os' perceptions of the forced compliance situation were analyzed in terms of the input components into the Bayesian model: prior probabilities of the relevant attitudes and the diagnostic values of the behaviors which the actor may choose. In order to test propositions made by attribution theory about such perceptions (Kelley, 1967;Messick, 1971), Os viewed actors under conditions of Low Inducement (LI) and High Inducement (HI). Before observing the actor's decision, Os estimated the prior probabilities of the relevant attitudes and the conditional probabilities of compliance and refusal given each of the attitudes. After observing the actor's decision, Os estimated the posterior probabilities of the attitudes. As expected, in the LI condition, compared to the HI condition, compliance was seen as less probable and more diagnostic about the actor's attitudes, and the posterior probability of the corresponding attitude was higher. Contrary to expectations, within both conditions, compliance, compared to refusal, was seen as less diagnostic and more probable.     

Locus of control and the perception of freedom in an agent of reinforcement

Internals and externals observed a staged videotape presentation that portrayed a “teacher” and a “learner” engaging in a 20-item anagrams task. For externals, any variability (10, 50, and 90% schedule) in the reinforcing behavior of the “teacher” (agent of reinforcement) resulted in significantly greater perceived freedom than when no variability (0 and 100% schedule) occurred in behavior. For internals, perceived freedom was a negative linear function of the amount of reinforcement administered. Internals indicated that they could influence the behavior of the “teacher” in all reinforcement conditions, whereas externals indicated that they could influence only the “teachers” in the variable reinforcement conditions. It was concluded that greater freedom is attributed to a person whose behavior is perceived as congruent with the person's inner disposition.     

Attribution difficulty and memory for attribution-relevant information

This research compared the processing and retrieval of attribution-relevant information when the attributional inference is easy or difficult to make. Subjects attributed behavioral events to the person or to the situation, based on several items of context information. Each context sentence implied either the person or the entity as causal agent. When the attributional inference was difficult to make (an equal number of context sentences implied actor and entity as the causal agent), subjects recalled more of the behavioral events, recalled more context sentences, and were less confident in their attributions than when the attributional inference was easy to make (most context sentences implied the same causal agent). Subjects also recalled context information that was implicationally incongruent with the majority of the other context sentences with a higher probability than when that same information was implicationally congruent.     

A test of whether attributions provide for self-enhancement or self-defense

It is well known that people often make attributions in a way that is favorable to their self-concepts (see R. L. Collins, 1996, for a review). However, it is less clear whether the primary effect is to enhance self-esteem or to defend against the possible loss of self-esteem. The authors performed an experiment to test these possibilities against each other. In a completely between-participants design, participants recalled either a positive behavior or a negative behavior that was performed by themselves or others. They then judged the positivity or negativity of the behavior and made trait attributions about the actor (i.e., himself, herself, or others). The results indicated that although judgments and trait attributions for positive behaviors were similar for the self and for others, judgments and trait attributions for negative behaviors were less negative for the self than they were for others. The authors interpreted these and other findings as supporting a defensive strategy rather than an enhancive strategy.     

Culpable Control and Causal Deviance

Actions that are intended to produce harmful consequences can fail to achieve their desired effects in numerous ways. We refer to action sequences in which harmful intentions are thwarted as deviant causal chains. The culpable control model of blame (CCM) is a useful tool for predicting and explaining the attributions that observers make of the actors whose harmful intentions go awry. In this paper, we describe six types of deviant causal chains; those in which: an actor’s attempt is obviated by the intervention of another person or the environment; the intended effects could not have been produced regardless of the actor’s behavior; other causes diminish the actor’s causal role; the actor brings about foreseen but undesired consequences as a result of pursuing his or her focal goal; the focal action produces a chain of increasingly remote causal events; and the actor derives unforeseen benefits from his or her nefarious actions. A basic assumption of the CCM in these cases is that attributions for the participants’ actions will depend on positive and negative evaluations of their intentions and behaviors. We describe empirical findings that are consistent with this assumption, and predict other findings for causal deviance phenomena that have not yet been investigated empirically.     

Sex differences in attributions for the performance of women of a masculine task

Sex differences in the attributions of observers for the successful or unsuccessful behavior of a female actor performing a masculine task were studied. For the perceived causes of the outcome it was found that internal attributions were emphasized more for success than for failure. In addition, female observers attributed both types of outcome more to effort than did males. The nature of the outcome and the sex of the observer also affected the perceived personality traits of the actor. More positive traits were attributed to the successful than to the unsuccessful actor. The female observers attributed more instrumental traits to the actor than did the male observers. The results were discussed in terms of Jones and Davis's theory (1965) of correspondent inferences and the fact that competence was not viewed as being incompatible with femininity.     

Judging others in the shadow of suspicion

Previous research has found that when perceivers have reason to be suspicious of the motives underlying an actor's behavior, they are likely to draw inferences about the actor's true disposition that reflect a relatively sophisticated style of attributional processing. The present research was designed to examine some of the negative consequences that suspicion can have on perceivers' judgments. In each of the three studies reported, some subjects were made suspicious about the motives of an actor on the basis of contextual information surrounding the actor's behavior, rather than the behavior itself. Results of these studies suggest that, particularly when perceivers believe that the actions or motives of the actor could affect them, suspicion may cause perceivers to see the actor in a more negative light, even if the perceivers are not convinced that the actor's behavior was indeed affected by ulterior motives.The authors thank Patrick Carver and Gilbert Fein for their assistance with the stimulus materials for Study 1, and Jessica Cross, Thomas Tomlinson, and Amy Elmore for their assistance with Studies 2 and 3.     

Turning observers into actors: Differential causal attributions as a function of “empathy”

After being instructed either to “empathize with the actor” or to “picture the events clearly,” two groups of observers read a story describing an actor's behavior, and then gave free-response explanations of that behavior, and rated the importance of personal and situational causal factors. The hypothesis that causal attributions of empathizing observers would be less personal and more situational than those of nonempathizing observers received strong support, both from subjects' free responses and from their scale ratings. These findings provide evidence for an information-processing explanation of actor/observer attributional differences. Some practical applications of increasing the situationality of observers' causal attributions are discussed. The results also suggest a novel operational definition of “empathy”; and are interpreted as evidence for the effectiveness of “interpersonal simulations”.     

Variants of uncertainty

In contrast to formal theories of judgement and decision, which employ a single notion of probability, psychological analyses of responses to uncertainty reveal a wide variety of processes and experiences, which may follow different rules. Elementary forms of expectation and surprise in perception are reviewed. A phenomenological analysis is described, which distinguishes external attributions of uncertainty (disposition) from internal attributions of uncertainty (ignorance). Assessments of uncertainty can be made in different modes, by focusing on frequencies, propensities, the strength of arguments, or direct experiences of confidence. These variants of uncertainty are associated with different expressions in natural language; they are also suggestive of competing philosophical interpretations of probability.     

Identification, situational constraint, and social cognition: studies in the attribution of moral responsibility

In three experiments we studied lay observers' attributions of responsibility for an antisocial act (homicide). We systematically varied both the degree to which the action was coerced by external circumstances and the degree to which the actor endorsed and accepted ownership of the act, a psychological state that philosophers have termed "identification." Our findings with respect to identification were highly consistent. The more an actor was identified with an action, the more likely observers were to assign responsibility to the actor, even when the action was performed under constraints so powerful that no other behavioral option was available. Our findings indicate that social cognition involving assignment of responsibility for an action is a more complex process than previous research has indicated. It would appear that laypersons' judgments of moral responsibility may, in some circumstances, accord with philosophical views in which freedom and determinism are regarded to be compatible.     

Self-assessment and task performance

The present study tested the idea that the amount of effort expended in task performance is a function of the amount of uncertainty in one's ability level the resulting outcomes are expected to reduce. Two determinants of expected uncertainty reduction were manipulated: prior uncertainty about one's ability level and the diagnosticity of the task. Subjects first performed an initial task and then received fictitious feedback to manipulate their prior uncertainty. To induce low uncertainty, the feedback implied that the subjects are highly likely to have either low, intermediate, or a high level of ability. To induce high uncertainty, the feedback implied that the various ability levels were equally probable. Subjects then performed a task whose perceived diagnosticity regarding the ability under consideration was varied. As expected, subjects who were highly uncertain about their ability level performed better than subjects who were relatively certain they possessed either low, intermediate, or a high level of ability. Performance also improved with task diagnosticity, and the effect of task diagnosticity on performance was more pronounced when prior uncertainty was high than when it was low. Past research on the relationship between prior feedback and subsequent performance was discussed in light of the present results and a self-assessment model of achievement behavior.     

Perspective Effects on Causal Attributions of Success and Failure

The performance attributions of actors (participants on a task or in an interaction), active observers (co-actors who make observations of the actor) and passive observers (non-participants who observe but do not interact with the actor) were compared on a task in which actors succeeded or failed after competing or working independently. Contrary to Jones and Nisbett's (1971) divergent perspectives hypothesis, the results indicated that the subjects' person attributions were influenced interactively by the actor's outcome and the subjects' perspective while their situation attributions were influenced interactively by their perspective and the nature of the task. The implications of these findings for the divergent perspectives hypothesis were discussed.     

Can infants attribute to an agent a disposition to perform a particular action?

The present research investigated whether 13.5-month-old infants would attribute to an actor a disposition to perform a recurring action, and would then use this information to predict which of two new objects-one that could be used to perform the action and one that could not-the actor would grasp next. During familiarization, the infants watched an actor slide various objects forward and backward on an apparatus floor. During test, the infants saw two new identical objects placed side by side: one stood inside a short frame that left little room for sliding; the other stood inside a longer frame that left ample room for sliding. The infants who saw the actor grasp the object inside the short frame looked reliably longer than those who saw the actor grasp the object inside the long frame. This and control results from a lifting condition provide evidence that by 13.5 months, infants can attribute to an actor a disposition to perform a particular action.