Attribution Theory
Prepared by:
Carmelo Perez
Anceta Coc
Manuel Canti
Berrisford Cal
Lavinia Cal
Hermelinda Tush
Presentation Overview
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Background
Purpose
Definition
Weiner’s Attribution
Two General Types
Fundamental Attribution Error
Self-Serving Bias
Making Attributions
Implications for Teaching
References
Background of Attribution theory
• Was developed over time from the theories of Fritz
Heider, Edward Jones, Keith Davis, and Harold
Kelley. All were social psychologists.
Approximate year of origin:
• Heider first wrote about attribution theory in his
book The Psychology of Interpersonal Relationships
(1958) which played a central role in the origination
and definition of attribution theory.
• Jones and Davis' systematic hypotheses about the
perception of intention was published in 1965 in the
essay "From Acts to Dispositions." Kelley published
"Attribution in Social Psychology" in 1967.
Purpose of the Theory
• Attribution theory is about how people make
causal explanations; about how they answer
questions beginning with "why?" The theory
deals with the information they use in making
causal inferences, and with what they do with
this information to answer causal questions.
The theory developed within social psychology
as a means of dealing with questions of social
perception.
Definition
• Attribution theory is the area of cognitive
therapy that is concerned with how people
explain the causes of behavior, their own and
those of others.
• A major concept in the study of attribution
theory is locus of control (Internal vs.
External).
Weiner’s Attribution
Attribution theory assumes that people try to
determine why people do what they do, that is,
interpret causes to an event or behavior.
An attribution can be defined by three stages:
1. behavior must be observed/perceived
2. behavior must be determined to be intentional
3. behavior attributed to internal or external
causes
Weiner’s Attribution
According to him, the most important factors affecting
attributions are ability, effort, task difficulty, and
luck. His main focus is about achievement.
Attributions are classified along three causal
dimensions:
1. Locus of control (two poles: internal vs. external)
2. Stability (do causes change over time or not?)
3. Controllability (causes one can control such as skills
vs. causes one cannot control such as luck, others’
actions, etc.)
Two general types
• Personal Attribution
• Situational Attribution
Personal Attribution
- Explanation in terms of personal characteristics
Example:
• The baby must be a happy baby
• He scored well on the exam because he is
smart.
• She tripped because she is clumsy.
Situational Attribution
• Explanations in terms of Situational factors
Example:
• “Someone must have just played with the
baby.”
• He scored well because it was an easy test.
• She tripped because of a squirrel.
Fundamental Attribution Error
• Is that we over estimate the power of the
person and underestimate the power of the
situation.
Why do people make this error?
*The situation is not salient when people make
attribution for the behavior of others, but the
situation is salient when making attribution for
one’s own behavior.
* Thus, people are more inclined to take the
situation into account when explaining their
own behavior
Self- Serving Bias
• People do not make objective
situational/personal attributions for their own
behavior.
• They tend to attribute their success to
dispositional factors and their failures to
situational factors.
How do people make attributions?
• Kelley argued that people take 3 factors into account
when making a personal vs. situational:
 Consistency: the degree to which the actor performs
that same behavior toward an object on different
occasions.
 Distinctiveness: the degree to which the actor
performs different behaviors with different objects.
 Consensus: the degree to which other actors perform
the same behavior with the same object.
Choice leads to stronger attributions of
liking.
• Cognitive dissonance theory:
- people strive for consistency
- Seems simple, but this idea lead to very
counter- intuitive findings.
Festinger and Carlsmith had participants who
paid $1 to $20 to lie. One person was paid $1
to do this, and the other person was paid $20.
Which person should like the task more?
Result
• Participants paid $1 enjoyed the task more
than participants paid $20. The $20 person
had consistent cognitions (“This is stupid, but
I’m being compensated for doing it.”). The $1
person had inconsistent cognitions (“This is
stupid, and I have no reason to do it.”).
• Participants in the $1 resolved the dissonance
by changing their attitude about the task (“I’m
not being adequately compensated for this,
but that’s OK. This is actually fun!”).
There are three ways to eliminate
dissonance:
(1) reduce the importance of the dissonant
beliefs,
(2) add more consonant beliefs that outweigh
the dissonant beliefs,
(3) change the dissonant beliefs so that they are
no longer inconsistent.
Self-Perception Theory
 People decide their own attitudes and feelings from
watching their selves behave in various situations.
• Both participants observed their behavior (doing the
task) and made a causal attribution for their own
behavior. Participants in the $20 observed his/her
own behavior and thought (“I’m doing this task
because I’m getting paid.”). Participants in the $1
observed his/her own behavior and thought (“I’m
doing this task because I must enjoy it.”).
Implications for teaching.
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Role models
Reinforcement techniques
Use incentives to make children care
Reward system
locus
Stability
Controllability
References
• Heider, F. (1958). The Psychology of Interpersonal.
Relations. New York: Wiley.
• http://education.calumet.purdue.edu/vockell/edPs
ybook/Edpsy5/edpsy5_attribution.htm
• http://www.bookrags.com/research/attributionstheory-geca/
• Attributions Theory from Encyclopedia of
Childhood and Adolescence.© 2005-2006
Thomson Gale, a part of the Thomson
Cooperation.
• Attribution Theory in the Organizational Sciences
Theoretical and Empirical Contributions. Edited by
Mark J. Martinko