Spontaneous discounting of availability in frequency judgment tasks

Discounting is a causal-reasoning phenomenon in which increasing confidence in the likelihood of a particular cause decreases confidence in the likelihood of all other causes. This article provides evidence that individuals apply discounting principles to making causal attributions about internal cognitive states. In particular, the three studies reported show that individuals will fail to use the availability heuristic in frequency estimations when salient causal explanations for availability exist. Experiment 1 shows that fame is used as a cue for discounting in estimates of surname frequency. Experiment 2 demonstrates that individuals discount the availability of their own last name. Experiment 3, which used individuals' initials in a letter-frequency estimation task, demonstrates that simple priming of alternative causal models leads to discounting of availability. Discounting of cognitive states can occur spontaneously, even when alternative causal models are never explicitly provided.     

The other way around: Effects of causal attributions on estimates of consensus,distinctiveness, and consistency

It was hypothesized that the attributed cause of a given person's behavior will affect inferences about its generalizability over persons (consensus), stimuli (distinctiveness), and circumstances (consistency). Moreover, these effects were expected to parallel the effects of consensus, distinctiveness, and consistency information on causal attributions. Experiment 1 provided support for these predictions but also showed that attribution affected consensus judgments less than it affected judgments of distinctiveness and consistency, particularly when consensus was not the first characteristic estimated. Using a different set of stimulus materials and a different manipulation of attribution, Experiments 2 and 3 provided further evidence for the effects of attribution on inferences of consensus information. Experiment 3 indicated that the false consensus effect—actors' tendency to assume that the majority of people share their behavior—may be due to actors' tendency to attribute their behavior to situational factors. Implications of the present studies for biased estimates of consensus and the use of consensus and attribution as mediating variables are discussed.     

When unexpected behavior is attributed to the environment

Two experiments were conducted to investigate a modification of the Jones and Davis (1965) analysis of attribution. Subjects were confronted with a situation in which there were two possible causes for an event, and differential information about these causes was provided such that subjects were much more informed about the nature of one potential cause than the other. This information also imparted to the subjects a definite expectancy about the forthcoming event. When the event disconfirmed subjects' expectancies, responsibility was attributed to the cause about which least was known. This result was found in both experiments. In addition, Experiment II offered some suggestive evidence that a disconfirmed expectancy will lead the person to direct his attention toward potential causes about which he is uninformed.     

Selective self-disclosure with and without correspondent performance

If people are motivated to elicit attributions from others, are they capable of using attribution theory as a means to this end? To explore this question, subjects were asked to select information to disclose to hypothetical target persons in order to have those target persons make specific attributions about the subjects' traits and abilities. The disclosures conformed well to a model sensitive to the principles of augmentation and discounting. The model considers the causal relevance and value of personal information and whether the self-presenter is given the opportunity to engage in behavior that accomplishes some specific self-presentational objective. The results, in line with the model, showed that subjects having the opportunity to engage in such “correspondent” behavior, are subsequently eager to disclose impediments that highlight the likely presence of highly valued behavioral causes. Subjects without such an opportunity seek to disclose facilitating causal factors that would make an effective performance appear to be more likely should the opportunity later arise.     

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.     

Discounting and the role of the relation between causes

This research investigates how the relation between two causes (i.e. whether they co‐occur or not) affects the likelihood to discount one of them. In two experiments, two causes were either systematically paired together (positive relation), were paired with many other causes (independent relation), or were never paired together (negative relation). The results indicate that discounting of one of the causes (target cause) depends on the relation with the other cause (alternative cause) and the order in which the alternative cause was presented and produced the outcome alone. If information on the independent outcome of the alternative cause came prior to the joint outcome of the alternative and target cause (forward order), then discounting of the target cause occurred regardless of the relation between the two causes. If, however, information on the independent outcome of the alternative cause came after the joint outcome of the alternative and target cause (backward order), then discounting of the target cause occurred mainly when there was a positive or negative relation between the causes, but not when there was an independent relation. The degree of backward discounting given a positive or negative relation was largely identical. These results are consistent with the retrospective revaluation hypothesis of Dickinson and Burke ( 1996 ) and shed new light on the role of the relation between causes on discounting. Copyright © 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Children's developing understanding of the motivational role of affect: An attributional analysis

This research examined children's developing understanding of relations between attributions, affects, and intended social behavior. Three scenarios involving exam success, making a baseball team, and a bicycle collision were constructed to elicit, respectively, either pride, gratitude, or guilt in a target child. In Experiment 1, two story conditions varied the locus (internal or external) of the cause of the outcome in the pride scenario and the controllability of the cause in the gratitude and guilt scenarios. For each condition, children aged 5 to 11 made judgments about the locus or controllability of the cause; they indicated how proud, grateful, or guilty the target child would feel; and they made inferences about an intended action (self-reward, reciprocation, or reparation) that might follow the outcome. In Experiment 2, the causal information and affective information were manipulated in a factorial design, and children made judgments about the intended action. There were age-related increases in the linkages between attributions and affects and between affects and intended behavior. This was particularly true in the case of guilt. These findings were interpreted as evidence for the growing influence of affect as a mediator between causal thought and action.     

An investigation of the link between attributional judgments and stereotype‐based judgments

Three experiments investigated the relationship between the attributions made for stereotype‐relevant behavior and stereotype‐based judgments. In Experiment 1 participants were presented with a short scenario describing a single stereotypic behavior and were given either a situational or a dispositional explanation for the behavior, before evaluating both the target and the group as a whole on stereotype‐based dimensions. As predicted, participants given a situational explanation for the stereotypic behavior described in the target and the group in less stereotype‐based terms than did baseline participants. In Experiment 2 and 3 participants were presented with a short scenario describing either a single stereotypic or counter‐stereotypic behavior but were asked to provide an explanation for the behavior, rather than being given one. As predicted, stereotypic behavior was attributed more strongly to dispositional than situational factors and counter‐stereotypic behavior more strongly to situational than dispositional factors. No overall moderation of group‐based beliefs relative to baseline was seen in either experiment. Correlations between the attributions and stereotypic‐based judgments did, however, show a relationship between the strength of the attributions made for the behaviors and stereotype‐based judgements. Implications for the moderation of stereotype‐based judgments are discussed. Copyright © 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Control motivation and attributions for performance

Two experiments examined the relationship between the desire for effective control over performance outcomes and attributions of causality for those outcomes. In Experiment 1, subjects were led to believe that they had either succeeded at or failed a test that was either unimportant or important. As predicted, failure of the important test was attributed more to lack of effort (a controllable cause) and less to lack of ability (an uncontrollable cause) than was failure of the unimportant test. In Experiment 2, all subjects were led to believe that they had failed a test. Once again, subjects were informed that the test was either important or unimportant. In addition, half the subjects were told that they would be undergoing more tests in a later testing session, while half were not informed of any future testing. As in Experiment 1, subjects failing the important test attributed their failure less to lack of ability than did subjects failing the unimportant test. The anticipation of future testing interacted with test importance in its effects on attributions to ability. Subjects performing the unimportant task attributed their failure more to lack of ability when anticipating future performance than when not. Attributions of subjects performing an important task were not affected by the anticipation of future performance. Results were discussed in terms of the need for control over performance outcomes.     

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.     

A test of the self-perception explanation of the effects of rewards on intrinsic interest

An experiment was conducted to test the proposition that rewards undermine or enhance intrinsic interest in a task to the extent that individuals interpret their behavior as being motivated by the reward. It was predicted that when subjects were denied the opportunity to develop and confirm this attribution, rewards would not produce an undermining effect, but rather would enhance dispositions and behavior. Subjects were recruited to evaluate a new sugar-free soft drink. Two levels of incentives (reward-no reward), two levels of examination (opportunity-no opportunity), and three levels of outcome (good-neutral-poor) were employed. The results support the prediction that an incentive's effect depends on the examination opportunity. In the examination condition, rewarded subjects attributed their behavior more to external factors than did unrewarded subjects, but gave more negative product evaluations only after tasting it. In the no examination condition, there were no differences in the attributions made by rewarded and unrewarded subjects, and rewarded subjects were more positively disposed toward the product both before and after tasting it. These results are explained as a consequence of two properties of rewards, enhancement through reinforcement and undermining through discounting, and of hypothesis-testing processes.     

Attributional inference across cultures: similar automatic attributions and different controlled corrections

Five studies examined the automatic and controlled components of attributional inference in U.S. and East Asian (EA) samples. Studies 1 through 3 used variations of the "anxious woman" paradigm, manipulating the inferential goal (dispositional or situational) and the normative impact of situational constraint information (discounting or augmenting). In each study, U.S. and EA participants under cognitive load produced strong automatic attributions to the focus of their inferential goal (dispositional or situational). Compared with the U.S. cognitive load participants, U.S. no load participants corrected their attributions according to the normative rules of inference. In contrast, EA no load participants corrected in the direction of situational causality, even when the specific content of the situational information provided should have promoted stronger dispositional inferences. Studies 4 and 5 examined and ruled out alternative accounts. Results are discussed in terms of a situational causality heuristic present in EA individuals.     

Causal attributions for behaviors consistent or inconsistent with an actor's personality traits: Differences between those offered by actors and observers

The present research was designed to investigate differences in the attributions offered from the actor's perspective and the observer's perspective. It was predicted that causal attributions for behaviors inconsistent with an actor's personality traits would be more situational when offered from the actor's perspective than when offered from the observer's perspective. In contrast, it was predicted that causal attributions for behaviors consistent with an actor's personality traits would be more dispositional when offered from the actor's perspective than when offered from the observer's perspective. Consistent with these hypotheses, extraverts explained introverted behaviors and introverts explained extraverted behaviors more situationally from the actor's perspective than from the observer's perspective. Furthermore, extraverts explained extraverted behaviors and introverts explained introverted behaviors more dispositionally from the actor's perspective than from the observer's perspective. These differences in the attributions offered by actors and observers were attenuated but not eliminated when attributors had access to useful situational information with which to apply the discounting principle.     

THE ROLE OF GENERALISED EXPECTANCIES IN DETERMINING CAUSAL ATTRIBUTIONS FOR SUCCESS AND FAILURE IN TWO SOCIAL CLASSES

Summary . The sources of discrepancies in causal attributions for success and failure and for self and other attributions of outcome may become clearer when specific research attention is paid to the role of generalised expectancies in the attributional process. The present study hypothesised that when information about task and outcome is standardised, the attributions of both actors and observers will tend to reflect generalised expectancies, evoked in this study by two levels of SES in both actor and observer conditions, more than they will self-serving biases. 230 sixth grade Jewish Israeli pupils of two SES levels were assigned to one of three experimental conditions. All pupils received eight anagrams, four soluble by all and four insoluble. Those in the self-attribution condition attributed their own outcomes to various causes, while those in the similar and different other conditions attributed the same outcomes for pupils of apparently similar or different social class, after having first completed the anagrams themselves. The results indicated that while pupils of high SES tended to attribute both their own and others' outcomes in ways consistent with high generalised expectancy for success, pupils of low SES attributed their own outcomes more to external, unstable factors, and differentiated consistently in their attributions for the self, for similar and for different others. It was argued that these differences reflect undifferentiated, global perceptions of causality among high SES pupils, whose patterns of attribution are consistent both with teacher values and their own experience. Low SES pupils have more differentiated perceptions of causality since uncertainty as to the real causes of their learning outcomes motivates them to greater, but not always adaptive, attributional activity.     

Attributional processes in the learned helplessness paradigm: behavioral effects of global attributions

Following the learned helplessness paradigm, I assessed in this study the effects of global and specific attributions for failure on the generalization of performance deficits in a dissimilar situation. Helplessness training consisted of experience with noncontingent failures on four cognitive discrimination problems attributed to either global or specific causes. Experiment 1 found that performance in a dissimilar situation was impaired following exposure to globally attributed failure. Experiment 2 examined the behavioral effects of the interaction between stable and global attributions of failure. Exposure to unsolvable problems resulted in reduced performance in a dissimilar situation only when failure was attributed to global and stable causes. Finally, Experiment 3 found that learned helplessness deficits were a product of the interaction of global and internal attribution. Performance deficits following unsolvable problems were recorded when failure was attributed to global and internal causes. Results were discussed in terms of the reformulated learned helplessness model.     

Person perception in the heat of conflict: Negative trait attributions affect procedural preferences and account for situational and cultural differences

Disputes by their nature involve contentious behavior. If one attributes such behavior to underlying personality traits, these attributions can be quite damning. The current research investigated negative trait attributions and their impact on dispute resolution decisions. We hypothesized that judging one's opponent to be low in agreeableness and high in emotionality (e.g. stubborn and volatile) shifts one's preference towards more formal procedures – formal in the sense that a third party judge controls the process and outcome. Drawing on the attribution literature, we hypothesized that two antecedents of these judgments (and consequent preferences) are the perceiver's level of prior information and the perceiver's cultural proclivity to explaining behavior in terms of personal dispositions. Results of an experiment measuring reactions to a hypothetical dispute found that prior information and culture (USA vs Hong Kong) increased trait attributions and preferences for formal procedures. Additionally, expectancy measures showed interaction effects suggesting that disputants dynamically construct expectancies in light of their personality impressions.     

The effect of affirmative action on attributions about minority group members

In the first study subjects were given information about an applicant to graduate school and asked to rate his qualifications. The information experimentally varied (a) whether the school had an affirmative action policy, (b) the ethnicity of the applicant, and (c) whether the applicant was accepted or rejected. Based on Kelley's discussion of the discounting and augmentation principles, it was predicted that the minority applicant would be rated as less qualified when the university was committed to an affirmative action program. The reverse pattern was predicted for the non-minority applicant. The results supported the first prediction but not the second. Experiment 2 was designed to eliminate alternative interpretations of the data and the same results were found. Possible interpretations for the failure of affirmative action in affecting the ratings of nonminority applicants are discussed.     

Guilt assessment after retracted voluntary and coerced-compliant confessions in combination with exculpatory or ambiguous evidence

We investigated how voluntary confessions, coerced-compliant confessions, and no-confessions influenced guilt assessments in combination with other exculpatory or ambiguous evidence. In three experiments (total N = 808), participants studied case information and provided guilt assessments. As expected, in Experiment 1 and 2a, (i) voluntary confessions to protect a family member elicited stronger guilt attributions than no-confessions and (ii) ambiguous evidence led to stronger guilt attributions than exculpatory evidence. In Experiment 2b, voluntary confessions to protect a group-member (but not to protect a family-member) elicited stronger guilt attributions than no-confessions. Exculpatory eyewitness evidence elicited stronger guilt attributions than exculpatory DNA evidence and participants assigned more weight to exculpatory DNA than eyewitness evidence. Participants were able to discount coerced-compliant confessions when they received information about the interrogations (Experiments 2a/b), but did not consistently consider risk factors for (voluntary) false confessions outside the interrogation room when assessing guilt.     

Responding to sexual harassment complaints: Effects of a dissolved workplace romance on decision-making standards

We introduce and provide support for an ethical decision-making framework as an explanation for the social–cognitive process through which observers make decisions about a sexual harassment complaint that stems from a prior workplace romance. We conducted two experiments to examine effects of features of a dissolved hierarchical workplace romance and subsequent harassing behavior on raters' responses to a sexual harassment complaint. In Experiment 1, results based on a sample of 217 employees indicate that their attributions of responsibility for the harassment mediated the link between their knowledge of features of the romance and three recommended personnel actions. In Experiment 2, results based on a sample of 258 members of the Society for Human Resource Management indicate that their degree of recognition of the accused's social–sexual behavior as immoral mediated the link between their knowledge of features of the romance and harassment and their attributions of responsibility. Raters' attributions of responsibility, in turn, predicted three recommended personnel actions. We discuss theoretical and practical implications from an ethical decision-making perspective.