关于归因定向与行为预测的实验研究

不同的归因方式将导致人们对行为的不同预测倾向。本文正是基于这样的假设,来考察在信息匮乏的情况下,性情归因和情景归因对他人积极行为和消极行为的预测倾向的影响。结果发现,两种归因方式都导致被试对积极行为的预测多于对消极行为的预测,而情景归因下的被试对积极行为的预测又显著多于性情归因下的被试。在此基础上,在引人价值判断的因素后,发现不同的归因方式启动了不同的价值判断,进而影响到对行为的预测。     

中学生学业成就归因与学习动力的相关研究

用自编问卷对913名中学生学业成就归因和学习动力状况进行了调查,发现: (1)整体上看中学生较多使用内在原因和可控原因解释自己的学习成绩; (2)不同性别和不同年级学生有不同的归因倾向; (3)归因倾向与学习动力有明显联系,使用因子分析法得到“自挫因子”对学习动力有很大的消极影响。本文还就如何进行归因训练进行了讨论。     

Retaliatory motivation enhances attributions of hostility when people process ambiguous social stimuli

We hypothesized that provocation and readiness to aggress (Retaliatory Motivation) would increase the tendency to construe the ambiguous actions of others as reflecting hostile intent. Male undergraduates were either verbally provoked or not provoked by a male experimenter and half were led to believe that they would be allowed to retaliate anonymously against the provoker in the form of a potentially damaging written evaluation. Participants then rated the hostility and aggressive intent of the characters in brief ambiguous scenarios of interpersonal conflict. According to prediction, men who were provoked and anticipated retaliation against their provoker rated the scenarios as containing hostility and aggression to a significantly greater extent than did non‐provoked or merely provoked participants. Results are discussed within a motivation‐based affective relevance model of perception. Aggr. Behav. 29:155–172, 2003. © 2003 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.     

Cognitive Induction of Anger and Depression: The Role of Power, Attribution, and Gender

The causes of and contributors to negative emotions have been areas of interest in psychology for decades. Recent work has shown a variety of negative emotions, including anger and depression, to be related. The present study investigated the effects of power, attributional style, and gender on anger and depression using a series of narrative mood inductions presented to 120 undergraduates. Results indicated that participants in the external attribution and low power conditions demonstrated significantly higher levels of postinduction anger than those in other conditions. In addition, the influence of internal attributions on postinduction depression scores approached significance. The effectiveness of the study's mood induction methodology is discussed and suggestions are made for future research.     

Self-perceived Authenticity is Contaminated by the Valence of One’s Behavior

Two studies tested whether people are biased to infer that their positive actions are more authentic than their negative actions. In Study 1, participants identified a positive or negative personal characteristic and assessed the authenticity of past behavior that reflected that characteristic. In Study 2, people imagined themselves performing positive and negative behaviors that they authentically did or did not want to perform. Both studies showed that people’s judgments of the authenticity of their behavior were contaminated by their perceptions of the valence of their behavior even when the objective authenticity of the behavior was controlled. Future research must disentangle authenticity and positivity to determine the degree to which each contributes to positive outcomes that have been attributed to authenticity.     

Empowering and legitimizing the fundamental attribution error: Power and legitimization exacerbate the translation of role‐constrained behaviors into ability differences

Our daily interactions are influenced by the social roles we endorse. People however underestimate these role constraints in their everyday explanation relying on individual dispositions to make sense of behaviors. Two studies investigated whether this bias is exacerbated when role structure is legitimated and when power matches the advantages conferred by the social roles of a quiz game. Legitimacy as well as power increased the tendency for both advantaged (questioner) and disadvantaged (answerer) actors (Study 1) as well as naïve observers of the quiz game (Study 2) to attribute to ability the behaviors elicited by social roles. These results extend previous findings. People are more prone to explain constrained behaviors by differences in ability when role structure is legitimated and when power asymmetry matches role structure. Legitimacy and power may then play an important role in the translation of role constraints into inferences about ability.     

领导对建言反应的动机感知作用机制:基于归因理论的阐释

基于归因理论,从领导对建言行为动机的认知视角,解释领导对建言差异反应的原因。当领导认为员工建言基于组织关心动机、亲社会动机时,会给予表扬/认可、奖赏、执行等积极反应;当领导认为员工建言是基于挑战动机、疏离动机、印象管理动机或自我保护动机时,会给予批评/惩罚、忽视、报复等消极反应。此外,权力距离能够调节领导对建言动机的感知,即低权力距离领导,对建言行为更为接纳、支持,会增强专业性、建言氛围与积极动机感知的关系,减弱挑战性建言与消极动机感知的关系;而高权力距离领导,倾向于绝对优势的权力和对下属的控制,会减弱专业性、可信性及建言氛围与积极动机感知的关系,增强挑战性建言与消极动机感知的关系。最后,建议未来的研究关注以下几个方面:(1)将建言作为一个过程来探讨,研究领导对建言的反应如何影响员工后续的态度和行为;(2)研究建言氛围形成的原因及其作用;(3)关注情绪在建言行为中的功能机制等。     

Some comments on the distinction between intention and intentionality

The topic of intention has recently received attention from behavior analysts (Hineline, 2003; Neuman, 2004). From a behavior-analytic perspective, it is important to identify the circumstances in which people utter such terms, and to identify the potential circumstances that maintain such utterances. It follows that from a behavior-analytic perspective, the focus is primarily on those who observe behavior and attribute intentions to that behavior. However, there has not been a distinction between intention and intentionality. The current analysis stresses the distinction between the two terms, both from a traditional point of view (psychologist and layperson) and from a behavior-analytic point of view. From a behavior analyst's perspective, the distinction is important because observers may be responding to distinct functional relations when they attribute intention or intentionality to behavior.