Removing the shadow of suspicion: the effects of apology versus denial for repairing competence- versus integrity-based trust violations

Two studies were conducted to examine the implications of an apology versus a denial for repairing trust after an alleged violation. Results reveal that trust was repaired more successfully when mistrusted parties (a) apologized for violations concerning matters of competence but denied culpability for violations concerning matters of integrity, and (b) had apologized for violations when there was subsequent evidence of guilt but had denied culpability for violations when there was subsequent evidence of innocence. Supplementary analyses also revealed that the interactive effects of violation type and violation response on participants' trusting intentions were mediated by their trusting beliefs. Combined, these findings provide needed insight and supporting evidence concerning how trust might be repaired in the aftermath of a violation.     

Repairing trust with individuals vs. groups

This study incorporates insights from research on group decision-making and trust repair to investigate the differences that arise when alleged transgressors attempt to regain the trust of groups as compared to individuals. Results indicate that repairing trust is generally more difficult with groups than individuals, and both groups and individuals were less trusting when trustees denied culpability (rather than apologized) for a competence-based violation or apologized (rather than denied culpability) for an integrity-based violation. However, the interaction of violation-type and violation-response also ultimately affected the relative difficulty of repairing trust with groups vs. individuals, with the greater harshness of groups dissipating when the transgressors’ responses were effectively matched with the type of violation. Persuasive argumentation rather than normative pressure, furthermore, mediated these differences. Thus, the sequencing of individual vs. group assessments mattered, such that subsequent group assessments affected initial individual assessments but not the reverse.     

Understanding the effects of substantive responses on trust following a transgression

Four experiments were conducted to investigate the implications of ‘substantive’ responses for the repair of trust following a violation and the cognitive processes that govern how and when they are effective. These studies examined two forms of substantive responses, penance and regulation, that represent different categories of trust repair attempts. The findings from Studies 1–3 suggest that both can be effective to the extent that they elicit the crucial mediating cognition of perceived repentance. Data from Study 2 revealed that trustors saw signals of repentance as more informative when the transgression was due to a lapse of competence than due to a lapse of integrity. Study 4 compared these substantive responses to apologies (a non-substantive response) and revealed that, despite their surface-level differences, they each repaired trust through ‘perceived repentance.’ The paper offers an integrative framework for understanding the relationships among a range of trustor responses.     

Silence speaks volumes: the effectiveness of reticence in comparison to apology and denial for responding to integrity- and competence-based trust violations

Prior research on responses to trust violations has focused primarily on the effects of apology and denial. The authors extended this research by studying another type of verbal response that is often used to respond to trust violations but has not been considered in the trust literature: reticence. An accused party may use reticence in a sincere and even legitimate attempt to persuade a trustor to withhold judgment. Yet, by considering information diagnosticity and belief formation mechanisms through which verbal responses influence trust, the authors argue that reticence is a suboptimal response because it combines the least effective elements of apology and denial. Specifically, reticence is a suboptimal response to an integrity violation because, like apology, it fails to address guilt. And reticence is a suboptimal response to a competence violation because, like denial, it fails to signal redemption. Results from 2 laboratory studies, simulating different contexts and using research participants from 2 different countries, provide support for the prediction. The results offer important implications for those who might use reticence to respond to a perceived trust violation and also for those who must judge another's reticence.     

An Attribution Theory Analysis of Romantic Jealousy

Two studies examined the utility of attribution theory (B. Weiner, 1985, 1995) in explaining romantic jealousy responses. In Study 1, by varying hypothetical scenarios according to Weiner's attribution distinction (B. Weiner, 1995), 156 undergraduates perceived jealousy to increase when an unfaithful partner's interaction with interlopers was deliberate (i.e., personal causality), controllable, intentional, and without mitigating excuses. High trait jealousy amplified these ratings but did not affect the underlying attribution relationships. Reversing the attribution-to-jealousy linkage in Study 2, 128 participants from the general population recalled jealousy episodes in their lives, then made attributions for the events and categorized them using Weiner's dimensions (B. Weiner, 1985). Jealousy was more likely when the cause of a partner's indiscretion was perceived to be internal, controllable, and intentional—although not necessarily stable. The findings verify that attribution theory identifies blame conditions that trigger jealousy responses.     

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.     

Dealing with Poor Performance: Supervisor Attributions and the Cost of Responding1

The Green and Mitchell (1979) model of the process by which supervisors diagnose and deal with the causes of subordinates' poor performance is based upon attribution theory. The notion is that the supervisor makes an attribution about the cause of the poor performance and then selects an appropriate response or solution to deal with the problem. Two ways in which this can lead to an inapprorpriate solution are, first, a bias toward making internal attributions and, second, an aversion to using costly, even though appropriate, solutions. This study demonstrates that it is possible to prompt participants to make more external attribution about poor performance. It also demonstrates that whichever attributions they make (either internal or external), the solutions they select to deal with the poor performance are congruent with their attributions provided that the solutions do not have explicit implementation costs associated with them. However, when implementation costs are made explicit, costs influence solution selection and reduce the congruence between the attributions and the selected solutions. The possible implications of this finding for success in dealing with poor performance are discussed.     

Violating equality in social dilemmas: emotional and retributive reactions as a function of trust, attribution, and honesty

In social dilemmas, equality is an important coordination rule. When equality is violated, people seek explanations. In Experiment 1, the authors assessed dispositional trust and found that especially high trusters were affected by the given explanation. High trusters reacted less negatively to external than internal explanations. Experiment 2, using a manipulation of trust in others, revealed a similar pattern across a wider range of negative emotions. In Experiment 3, the authors only induced high trust and showed that when the external explanation turned out to be a lie, emotional and retributive reactions became more negative. Moreover, attribution information did not influence reactions when participants realized that the information was dishonest.     

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.     

The causal influences of attributions on emotions: a procedural priming approach

According to attributional theories of emotion, feelings of guilt presuppose that the causes of a negative event are located within the individual (internal attribution), whereas feelings of anger presuppose that the causes of the eliciting event are located outside the individual (external attribution). This study tested whether these attributions in fact exert the claimed causal influence on emotional experiences. The study employed a procedural priming technique in which neutral events were repeatedly attributed either to oneself (internal attribution) or to another person (external attribution). Subsequently, participants were exposed to a negative event that was ambiguous as to its causes. The results reveal that the prior repeated use of internal attributions enhanced the tendency to experience guilt, whereas the repeated use of external attributions enhanced the tendency to experience anger. These findings support the assumption that attributions exert a causal influence on emotions.     

Differential methods of causal attributions for strangers vs acquaintances

Previous research has demonstrated that people are more likely to attribute a stranger's behavior to external causes if that behavior is common in a given population than if it is relatively unique (the consensus rule). It was proposed in the present paper that another and perhaps simpler rule is available for causal attributions for an acquaintance's behavior, such that more external attributions are made as the behavior becomes increasingly inconsistent with extant impressions of the target (the goodness-of-fit rule). It was found that the goodness-of-fitrule, but not the consensus rule, was used in the attribution of causality for acquaintances when the behavior could be made to fit with extant impressions. When the behavior was completely inconsistent with extant impressions, both consensus and goodness-of-fit rules were used, such that the most external attributions were made in the poor fit/high consensus condition.     

Developing human-machine trust: Impacts of prior instruction and automation failure on driver trust in partially automated vehicles

To prompt the use of driving automation in an appropriate and safe manner, system designers require knowledge about the dynamics of driver trust. To enhance this knowledge, this study manipulated prior information of a partial driving automation into two types (detailed and less) and investigated the effects of the information on the development of trust with respect to three trust attributions proposed by Muir (1994): predictability, dependability, and faith. Furthermore, a driving simulator generated two types of automation failures (limitation and malfunction), and at six instances during the study, 56 drivers completed questionnaires about their levels of trust in the automation. Statistical analysis found that trust ratings of automation steadily increased with the experience of simulation regardless of the drivers’ levels of knowledge. Automation failure led to a temporary decrease in trust ratings; however, the trust was rebuilt by a subsequent experience of flawless automation. Results showed that dependability was the most dominant belief of drivers’ trust throughout the whole experiment, regardless of their knowledge level. Interestingly, detailed analysis indicated that trust can be accounted by different attributions depending on the drivers’ circumstances: the subsequent experience of error-free automation after the exposure to automation failure led predictability to be a secondary predictive attribution of drivers’ trust in the detailed group whilst faith was consistently the secondary contributor to shaping trust in the less group throughout the experiment. These findings have implications for system design regarding transparency and for training methods and instruction aimed at improving driving safety in traffic environments with automated vehicles.     

Self-awareness, probability of improvement, and the self-serving bias.

Evidence for the self-serving bias (attributing success internally and failure externally) is inconsistent. Although internal success attributions are consistently found, researchers find both internal and external attributions for failure. The authors explain these disparate effects by considering the intersection of 2 systems, a system comparing self against standards and a causal attribution system. It was predicted that success and failure attributions are moderated by self-awareness and by the ability to improve. When self-focus is high (a) success is attributed internally. (b) failure is attributed internally when people can improve, (c) failure is attributed externally when people cannot improve, and (d) these attributions affect state self-esteem. Implications for the self-serving bias 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.     

Retrospective versus prospective explanations of changes in political opinion

Retrospective and prospective causal attributions of one's political opinion changes were compared in light of the distinction between external and internal attributions. Semistructured interviews focusing on three political issues were held with 47 psychology undergraduates. Subjects were asked to explain (a) why they changed opinion in the past, and (b) what would make them abandon their current positions in the future. Two judges estimated independently the importance the subjects attached to four categories of external attributions (firsthand and secondhand information, neutral and persuasive information sources) and two categories of internal attributions (cognitive elaboration and personality characteristics). As a group, subjects explained their past opinion changes by referring to several attribution categories whereas in their explanations of hypothetical future opinion changes they above all referred to (secondhand information on) crucial events. It is concluded that people feel something drastic would need to occur before they would be ready to abandon a political stance.     

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.     

Oriental wisdom for interpersonal life: Confucian ideal personality traits (Junzi personality) predict positive interpersonal relationships

Junzi personality refers to traits of ideal persons in Confucian philosophy and is a key to East-Asian indigenous personality studies. We proposed that Junzi personality predicts positive interpersonal relationships, mediated by internal and external attributions in affiliation goal areas. Participants from China (N = 337) completed self- and peer-rated questionnaires in three stages over a 4-month period. Results showed that Junzi personality significantly and positively predicted self-rated interpersonal competence and satisfaction and peer ratings of interpersonal performance. These effects were significantly mediated by internal and external attributions for affiliation. This research provides personality and interpersonal psychology insights by culturally compatible measures and frameworks rooted in East-Asian philosophy and also contributes to the literature on antecedents and consequences of affiliation attribution.     

Hierarchical Position, Gender, Accident Severity, and Causal Attribution

The two studies reported here confirmed the role of the attributor's hierarchical level in causal attributions about accidents in different types of organizations. In both studies, supervisors vs. subordinates had to analyze a minor work accident vs. a serious one. The first study used male vs. female subjects, whereas the second compared the target's position in the same (in-group) vs. different (out-group) hierarchical level as the attributor. In all cases, more internal attributions than external ones were given to explain the accident. These results demonstrate a tendency toward defensive attribution, whereby people tend to protect themselves or their group from blame or prejudice (Shaver, 1970a). This self-protective attribution bias was found to increase with accident severity, particularly in Study 2. The conclusion offers some suggestions for accident analysis and prevention.     

Parent and child causal attributions related to the child's clinical problem

Parents and children were asked to give causal attributions related to the child's learning or behavior problems and an area of success. Actor-observer differences and tendencies of actors to make differential attributions for their positive and negative outcomes were examined. A significant number of parents and childen were in disagreement regarding the cause of the child's problem. Parents made significantly more internal than external attributions for children's presenting problems. In contrast, children were evenly distributed in problem attributions. Both parents and children made significantly more internal success attributions. Research with clinical child populations is highlighted as a valuable way to validate, expand, and refine attribution theory while clarifying its practical applications.Portions of the data included here served as the basis for a presentation by the first author at the annual meeting of the American Psychological Association, New York, 1979. The authors wish to thank the Fernald research group for their comments, and the staff of the San Fernando Valley Child Guidance Clinic, the Fernald office staff, and Perry Nelson for assistance.     

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.