Imaging,empathy, and causal attribution

Three studies were conducted to test whether imagery accounts for the effects of empathy on attributions, that is, whether attributers construct and scan a mental image of social scenarios the same way that actual participants scan a real environment. According to this interpretation, attributers “see” the world as the participant does and make vicarious attributions. An alternative interpretation holds that subjects base vicarious attributions on recreating the motivations and affect of the actor, so that imaging is irrelevant to empathy and attributions. In the first study, subjects who imagined a story from the perspective of a particular character later showed differential recall of story details as a function of role, but not differential attributions. In Experiment 2, role-taking subjects showed clear effects of imaged perspective on recall for story details, but no effects on attributions of causality for an accident. Further, recall and attribution were uncorrelated. In the last study, empathy and imagery role-taking instructions produced independent effects: imagers showed pronounced perspective-relevant recall and empathizers did not. Neither showed unambiguous vicarious attributions. Recall and attribution were again uncorrelated. These studies suggest that the imagery explanation of empathy effects is untenable, and imply that the recall of perspective-relevant details is unlikely to mediate attributions of causality in imaginary scenarios.     

Misattributions in attribution research: Choices of scientific certainty vs. understanding of reality: A rejoinder

Fincham (1984) has argued that Nogami and Streufert (1983) advanced a thesis which (1) attempts to empirically demonstrate that attributions for an accident are lower with severe as opposed to less severe outcomes and (2) applies these data to account for previous contradictory findings of the ‘defensive attribution’ literature. The present authors show that Fincham's attribution of intent to Nogami and Streufert is in error and that the divergent views of Nogami and Streufert versus those of Fincham and associates reflect legitimate but different approaches toward the problem of attribution theory and research.     

Employment Qualifications,Person–Job Fit,Underemployment Attributions,and Hiring Recommendations: A three‐study investigation

Using an experimental design across three studies and four samples, we investigated the effects of employment qualification level (i.e., underqualified, adequately qualified, or overqualified) on hiring recommendations, and how the relationship was influenced by person–job (P‐J) fit and underemployment attributions. In Study 1, we tested and found support for the strength and effectiveness of the employment qualification level manipulation. In Study 2, the results demonstrated that overqualified applicants received higher ratings on objective P‐J fit, subjective P‐J fit, and hiring recommendations than underqualified applicants. Also, overqualified applicants were rated higher on objective and subjective P‐J fit than adequately qualified applicants. However, the results indicated no significant differences between adequately qualified and overqualified applicants on hiring recommendations. Finally, P‐J fit was found to fully mediate the employment qualification level–hiring recommendation relationship, but only subjective P‐J fit (i.e., and not objective P‐J fit) was a significant mediator. In Study 3, we assessed the potential effects of underemployment attribution (i.e., internal‐controllable vs. external‐uncontrollable) on interviewer hiring recommendation. Results demonstrated that applicants who made an external‐uncontrollable attribution for their overqualification were perceived negatively and received lower ratings on hiring recommendations than applicants who made an internal‐controllable attribution for their underemployment. Furthermore, the underemployment attribution‐hiring recommendation relationship was found to be fully mediated by subjective (but not objective) P‐J fit. Contributions of these results to theory, research, and practice, strengths and limitations, and directions for future research are discussed.     

Trait and situational attributions in a naturalistic setting: Familiarity, liking, and attribution validity

Student dormitory advisors (n = 16) made trait/situation attributions to themselves and also identified three friends and three acquaintances. Friends (n = 41) and acquaintances (n = 43) then made attributions to themselves along with attributions and familiarity ratings of the advisors who identified them. The actor-observer effect was obtained for situational but not for trait attributions, both when advisors' self-attributions were compared to attributions made about them by friends and acquaintances (common target) and when the latter's self attributions were compared to their target attributions (common rater). Among friends and acquaintances, target familiarity was positively related to trait attributions and was negatively related to uncertainty attributions. Also, familiarity was positively related to the validity of situational but not of trait attributions. It was concluded that familiarity appears to influence the process of attribution, but differentially for dispositional vs. situational attributions and for actor-observer differences vs. observer variations in attributions. Moreover, increased information about the actor as a result of greater familiarity may lead to both more accurate and more favorable attributions.     

Attribution processes in distressed and nondistressed couples: 4. Self-partner attribution differences

The importance of the self-other distinction for understanding the relation between attributions and marital satisfaction is examined in two studies. In Study 1, causal attributions for naturally occurring behavior by the self and spouse were investigated. Study 2 examined both causal and responsibility attributions for hypothetical behaviors. In both studies, the attributions of spouses seeking therapy were investigated in relation to those of happily married persons in the community. The results showed that self-other attribution differences varied as a function of marital distress. Nondistressed spouses showed a positive attribution bias by making more benign attributions for partner behavior as opposed to self-behavior, whereas distressed spouses showed a negative attribution bias by making less benign attributions for partner behavior than for self-behavior. These findings suggest that self-attributions may, in part, determine the impact of attributions for spouse behavior on marital satisfaction. The clinical relevance of the results and their implications for research on actor-observer attribution differences are outlined.     

Perfectionism, achievement motives, and attribution of success and failure in female soccer players

While some researchers have identified adaptive perfectionism as a key characteristic to achieving elite performance in sport, others see perfectionism as a maladaptive characteristic that undermines, rather than helps, athletic performance. Arguing that perfectionism in sport contains both adaptive and maladaptive facets, the present article presents a study of N = 74 female soccer players investigating how two facets of perfectionism-perfectionistic strivings and negative reactions to imperfection (Stoeber, Otto, Pescheck, Becker, & Stoll, 2007 )-are related to achievement motives and attributions of success and failure. Results show that striving for perfection was related to hope of success and self-serving attributions (internal attribution of success). Moreover, once overlap between the two facets of perfectionism was controlled for, striving for perfection was inversely related to fear of failure and self-depreciating attributions (internal attribution of failure). In contrast, negative reactions to imperfection were positively related to fear of failure and self-depreciating attributions (external attribution of success) and inversely related to self-serving attributions (internal attribution of success and external attribution of failure). It is concluded that striving for perfection in sport is associated with an adaptive pattern of positive motivational orientations and self-serving attributions of success and failure, which may help athletic performance. In contrast, negative reactions to imperfection are associated with a maladaptive pattern of negative motivational orientations and self-depreciating attributions, which is likely to undermine athletic performance. Consequently, perfectionism in sport may be adaptive in those athletes who strive for perfection, but can control their negative reactions when performance is less than perfect.     

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.     

Perception of achievement attribution in individual and group contexts: Comparative analysis of Japanese, Korean, and Asian-American results

The present study focuses on the relational dynamics between individual and group attributions and examines cultural variations of people's perceptions of self-enhancing and group-enhancing attributions. Middle school students in Japan, Korea and the USA (Hawaii) were asked to read a vignette and to evaluate the stimulus person who makes an internal or external attribution for his personal or team's success. The results revealed that: (i) the self-effacing attributor was perceived as likable by the participants from all three cultures, but as less self-confident by Asian-Americans; and (ii) although Japanese and Koreans share similar cultural backgrounds, they had different preferences for the group-enhancing or group-effacing attributions. The different systems of self-enhancement across cultures are discussed.     

Alcohol and Acquaintance Rape in Australia: Testing the Presupposition Model of Attributions About Responsibility and Blame1

According to the presupposition model of attributions about responsibility and blame (Bradbury & Fincham, 1990), an attribution of blame presupposes an attribution of responsibility. Both constructs share the dimensions of choice, intention, and accountability, but an additional dimension of liability relates only to blame. Reactions of 260 university students to acquaintance‐rape scenarios portraying different levels of alcohol intoxication were examined. Results showed that the model's dimensions explained much of the variance in attributions of responsibility and blame, although the hierarchical structure was not supported. Mediational analyses suggest that different attributional principles apply when assigning victim and perpetrator responsibility, which may explain why intoxicated victims are assigned more responsibility than sober victims, but intoxicated perpetrators are assigned less responsibility than sober perpetrators.     

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.     

Arrogant or self-confident? The use of contextual knowledge to differentiate hubristic and authentic pride from a single nonverbal expression

Two studies tested whether observers could differentiate between two facets of pride-authentic and hubristic-on the basis of a single prototypical pride nonverbal expression combined with relevant contextual information. In Study 1, participants viewed targets displaying posed pride expressions in response to success, while causal attributions for the success (target's effort vs. ability) and the source of this information (target vs. omniscient narrator conveying objective fact) were varied. Study 2 used a similar method, but attribution information came from both the target and an omniscient narrator; the congruence of these attributions was varied. Across studies, participants tended to label expressions as authentic pride, but were relatively more likely to label them as hubristic pride when (a) contextual information indicated that targets were arrogant and (b) no mitigating information about the target's potential value as a hard-working group member (i.e., that success was actually due to effort) was presented.     

Attributional style in depression: a meta-analytic review

In this article we report meta-analyses of the relation of attributional styles to depression. In 104 studies involving nearly 15,000 subjects, several attributional patterns had reliable associations with depression scores. For negative events, attributions to internal, stable, and global causes had a reliable and significant association with depression. Studies in which the attribution factors of ability and luck were measured also showed a reliable association with depression. For positive events, attributions to external, unstable, and specific causes were associated with depression. Ability and luck attribution factors for positive events were also associated with depression. The relations for positive events, however, were weaker than the corresponding ones for negative events. In general, these patterns of relations were independent of a number of potential mediators suggested by authors in this literature, including the type of subject studied (psychiatric vs. college student), the type of event about which the attribution is made (real vs. simulated), the depression measure used, or the publication status of the research report. These conclusions are compared with those of other reviews. Implications for attributional models of depression are discussed.     

Emotion and the Ultimate Attribution Error

The influence of specific emotions (fear and anger) on the ultimate attribution error was investigated. Participants were recruited from an undergraduate population. There were 420 participants (156 male) with a mean age of 19.26 years. Participants took part in an online study. The study identified participants’ political in-groups (Democrat or Republican), induced them to feel an emotion (fear, anger, or neutral), and asked them to make an attribution (dispositional or circumstantial control) for the good or bad behaviors of Democratic or Republican politicians. Results revealed an ultimate attribution error (participants made in-group favoring/out-group derogating attributions), and an influence of emotion over the pattern of attributions made within this attribution error. The hypothesis that the valence of emotions influences attributions within the ultimate attribution error was supported. No support was found for the hypothesis that appraisal dimensions of emotions influence attributions within the ultimate attribution error. Theoretical implications and future directions were discussed.     

Factors affecting reactions to a rape victim.

We examined the influence of the sex of the subject reacting to the rape victim, the type of rape (stranger vs. acquaintance), the location of the rape (inside vs. outside the victim's home), and the victim's attribution concerning the cause of the rape, on undergraduates' reactions to a rape victim. American undergraduates (264 women, 230 men) read a Rape Crisis Center Intake Form, watched a videotape of a rape victim (an actress) describing her psychological and behavioral reactions to the rape, and completed three questionnaires assessing their reactions to the victim. Women were more supportive of the rape victim than were men, and the stranger rape evoked more chance and characterological attributions than did the acquaintance rape. A rape outside the home evoked more chance attributions than did an "inside" rape. The rape victim was rated as having been more traumatized by the experience if she made any causal attribution than if she made no attribution at all.     

Spontaneous and reactive attributions following academic achievement

This paper describes two studies which deal with attributions following academic achievement. Study 1 investigated the influence of different types of instructions (spontaneous vs. reactive), self-concepts of ability (high vs. low), and outcomes (success vs. failure) on causal attributions in a school setting. Participants were 402 eighth to tenth graders. Students with a low self-concept of ability produced more attributions than students with a high self-concept. Under reactive conditions, students' attributions following success were in accordance with the self-consistency theory. Under spontaneous conditions, these students produced attributions in a self-serving way. Furthermore, success evoked more attributions than failure. In Study 2, 160 university students worked on an unfamiliar task (a computer-simulated dynamic system). The results supported the assumption that students spontaneously generate attributions to raise or at least preserve their self-esteem.     

The role of surprise in the attribution process

Abstract

We report five studies which compared two theories linking surprise to causal attribution. According to the attributional model, surprise is frequently caused by luck attributions, whereas according to the expectancy-disconfirmation model, surprise is caused by expectancy disconfirmation and stimulates causal thinking. Studies 1 to 3 focused on the question of whether surprise is caused by luck attributions or by unexpectedness. In Studies 1 and 2, subjects had to recall success or failure experiences characterised by a particular attribution (Study 1) or by low versus high surprisingness (Study 2), whereas in Study 3, unexpectedness and luck versus skill attributions were independently manipulated within a realistic setting. The main dependent variables were unexpectedness (Studies 1 and 2), degree of surprise (Studies 1 and 3), and causal attributions (Study 2). The results strongly suggest that surprise is caused by expectancy disconfirmation, whereas luck attributions are neither sufficient nor necessary for surprise. Studies 4 and 5 addressed the question of whether surprise stimulates attributional thinking, again using a remembered-incidents technique. The findings of the previous studies were replicated, and it was confirmed that surprising outcomes elicit more attributional search than unsurprising ones. Additional results from Study 5 suggest that causal thinking is also stimulated by outcomes that are both negative and important.     

Affect as a mediator of attributional egotism

A three-stage model of the relationships among achievement outcomes, outcome-related affect, attribution, and emotion is tested in two studies. It is suggested that success and failure elicit positive and negative affective states due to prior conditioning. These affective states then lead to an attribution process that serves to defend and enhance self-esteem. Next, emotional labels are chosen that are consistent with the affective states and the attributions. Two studies were designed to test the proposed relationships among achievement outcomes, affective states, and attributions. In the first study, subjects received information indicating that they were strongly or mildly aroused as a result of receiving outcome feedback on an achievement task. The results indicated that low arousal reduced egotistical attributions to internal factors. In the second study, subjects either succeeded or failed on an achievement task. Half of the subjects were provided with an opportunity to misattribute the arousal elicited by their outcomes to an irrelevant source. Subjects in the misattribution condition made less egotistical attributions to external factors than subjects who were given no opportunity to misattribute their arousal. The results of both studies suggest that outcome-related affect mediates the relationship between outcomes and attributions in achievement situations.     

Explaining the Inexplicable: Differences in Attributions for the Holocaust in Germany,Israel, and Poland

Seventy years have passed since the Holocaust, but this cataclysmic event continues to reverberate in the present. In this research, we examine attributions about the causes of the Holocaust and the influence of such attributions on intergroup relations. Three representative surveys were conducted among Germans, Poles, and Israeli Jews to examine inter‐ and intragroup variations in attributions for the Holocaust and how these attributions influence intergroup attitudes. Results indicated that Germans made more external than internal attributions and were especially low in attributing an evil essence to their ancestors. Israelis and Poles mainly endorsed the obedient essence attribution and were lowest on attribution to coercion. These attributions, however, were related to attitudes towards contemporary Germany primarily among Israeli Jews. The more they endorsed situationist explanations, and the less they endorsed the evil essence explanation, the more positive their attitude to Germany. Among Germans, attributions were related to a higher motivation for historical closure, except for the obedience attribution that was related to low desire for closure. Israelis exhibited a low desire for historical closure especially when attribution for evil essence was high. These findings suggest that lay perceptions of history are essential to understanding contemporary intergroup processes.     

Effects of Technology on Attributions of Performance and Employee Evaluation1

This study examines the effects of technological automation on explanations of why a person failed or succeeded at a task, and on evaluations of the user of technology. Subjects were presented with scenarios involving a photographer on an assignment. The scenarios manipulated 3 variables: (a) whether the camera was automatic or required skill, (b) experience level, and (c) whether the picture was a success or a failure. Subjects rated the picture's success or failure on attributions of ability and the technology. They also evaluated the photographer. Internal attribution was associated with technological devices requiring a greater amount of skill, while external attribution was associated with technological devices requiring less skill. When the picture was a success, ratings of internal attributions correlated positively with evaluations. When the picture was a failure, ratings of internal attributions correlated negatively with evaluations.