The effects of empathy and outcome on attribution: An examination of the divergent-perspectives hypothesis

Based on the theoretical ideas of Jones and Nisbett (Jones et al. Attribution: Perceiving the cause of behavior. New York: General Learning Press, 1971), and the recent findings of Regan and Totten (Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 32, 1975, 850–856), the present study assumed that from an attributional standpoint empathic observers and actors are functionally equivalent. On this basis it was predicted that empathic, relative to nonempathic, observers would make outcome attributions which have been typically found for actors themselves: They would attribute an actor's success to dispositional causes, but an actor's failure to situational causes. After instructions to empathize with the target, or to observe him, subjects watched a videotape of a target male attempting to make a good first impression on a female. Subjects later learned that the target had either succeeded or failed at making a good first impression, and were asked to make causal attributions for his outcome. As predicted, instructions to empathize led to dispositional attributions for success and situational attributions for failure, while standard observation instructions resulted in dispositional causal attributions regardless of outcome. The results were interpreted as supporting the contention that differential information processing may sufficiently account for the effects of outcome on causal attributions.     

Motivational determinants of coalition formation

Coalition preferences of 300 male and female subjects were ascertained under varying motivational conditions. Two of the experimental conditions repeated the typical three-person coalition paradigm, with a monetary reward (extrinsic motivation) offered for the winning of a luck-determined game. In a third condition, skill rather than luck influenced the outcome and no monetary reward was given for winning (intrinsic motivation). Two additional conditions examined coalition preferences in a mixed-motive situation, with either a small or a large monetary reward offered for winning a skill-related game. In the extrinsic motivation condition, the low and the medium resource persons typically desired to coalesce, contrary to the wishes of the excluded, high resource player. In contrast, the coalition between the low and the medium resource persons also was preferred by the high resource player in the intrinsic motivation condition. Coalition conflict was intermediate in the mixed-motive conditions. In sum, it was demonstrated that coalition formation and interpersonal conflict are dependent upon the motivational determinants of group activity.     

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.     

A semiautomated Wisconsin General Test Apparatus

A modification of the WGTA is described. It retains those features of the original apparatus which make it efficient. In addition, it provides (1) precise and largely automatic control of trial pacing and stimulus presentation, (2) simultaneous acquisition of data on problem-solving and locomotor activity of the S, (3) rapid change to any one of a wide variety of behavioral situations, and (4) thorough but quick cleaning and disinfection of the monkey cage.