Attribution and attributional
processes in personality
Craig Anderson
and
Directions
New
Critical Reviews
Uni
of
Mi
US
Eve
inte
wit
oth
peo
an
en
co
o
a
c
m
of
thou
feel
and
beh
Ho
on
re
to
va
e
b
t
are,
lwhy
to
a
exte
cau
arg
bel
W
t
be
pe
he
ca
p
e
an
eve
has
occ
Th
att
th
at
to
re
h
indi
answ
que
lik
'W
h
M
r
m
a
'H
B
cons
of
the
ans
'I
am
du
In
ad
se
is
li
t
influ
the
ans
to
tha
que
Th
im
o
th
so
f
inter
is
now
mo
app
tha
the
m
in
in
a
c
of
expl
eve
eve
To
acc
th
it
is
he
to
e
a
t
hono
dist
call
upo
by
Ke
an
M
(1
th
ro
the
attri
Th
sta
tha
the
lin
be
an
c
11/
Modern Personality
Psychology
Bernard
University
.
by
Edited
Gian-Vittorio
Caprara
Italy
Sapienza',
'La
Rome
of
l.
Van
Tilburg University,
USA
Introduction
work-related successes (such as promotion to district manager), interpersonal failures
(such as an argument with a close friend), or personal tragedies (such as the death.
of a spouse), largely depends on one's interpretations and understandings of the
events. Well-functioning adults have developed a useful understanding of both the
non-social and the social worlds around them. They have beliefs about how the world
works, about their role in it, and about their relationships with others. These beliefs
University
Guus
Weiner
of California,
Heck
The Netherlands
and to a great extent control their life situations.
Attribution theory is concerned with causal inferences,
or the perceived reason(s)
intentionally harmed me?' and so forth. The originator of this conceptual approach,
Fritz Heider, and subsequent key contributors, including Edward Jones and Harold
Kelley, are social psychologists. However, causal issues are as much a concern to
personality psychologists as to social psychologists. For instance, answers to a
question such as 'Why have I failed?' can surely affect self-esteem (consider the
HARVESTER
of attribution
WHEATSHEAF
York
New
~J
=-
London
Toronto
1992
Sydney
theory.
Our main goal in this chapter is to describe the basic processes and consequences
Tokyo
Singapore
inferences,
a stimulus-organism
(S-O)
connection,
should
be labelled
'the
attribution
295
15"
to
those
construc
(0R)
should
be
called
'the
attribu
proce
The
attributio
process
pertains
to
how
causal
inferen
are
reache
that
is,
how
one
prim
data
com
from
a
s
ins
Fo
ex
in
w
m
w
a
p
knows.
As
such,
the
attribut
proces
relates
to
episte
Attrib
shop
If
we
do
not
kno
the
per
the
we
ca
do
th
co
relate
to
function
Attribu
theory,
which
includ
both
attribu
and
attrib
Two
key
prin
in
this
pro
are
the
dis
pr
an
th
a
prin
The
disc
pri
is
sta
as
fo
'T
r
o
g
c
o
113
Thu
a
s
wh
ap
ho
de
h
i
l
An
early
issue
of
concern
to
attribut
theoris
was
wheth
the
perce
of
peop
dres
shop
stea
the
sam
can
of
Th
'o
p
c
t
l
obeys
the
same
rules
as
the
percept
of
object
Heide
(1958
for
exam
contende
that:
'Many
of
princip
underl
social
percep
have
paral
The
disc
prin
com
int
pla
wh
th
ad
e
c
acknowl
some
differen
in
percep
rules.
Impor
differ
inclu
the
fact
that
people
but
not
objects
are
interac
with
the
percei
evalu
the
augm
ad
ex
c
a
perceive
and
express
emotio
In
a
s
vein,
questi
were
imilar
raised
abou
similarit
of
the
rules
of
other-p
and
self-pe
And
again
there
was
risks
invo
in
taki
an
act
the
ac
on
ta
is
at
m
t
The
most
influent
and
endurin
concep
approa
to
forma
of
causa
ascriptio
was
offered
by
Kelley
(1967,
1971).
As
a
s
psych
he
ocial
wou
rece
a
m
disp
att
if
th
ac
w
d
o
in
a
s
w
o
the
self
as
opposed
to
judging
others.
Kelley
like
others
before
him,
presu
that
causality
to
the
more
formal
statistic
proced
emplo
by
scient
Assu
whic
fost
disp
attr
Co
in
th
(J
a
he
writes,
that
an
individu
enjoys
a
m
A
q
then
raised
is
wheth
uesti
the
ovie.
the
exte
to
whi
a
p
act
is
att
ar
to
di
c
of
acto
For
exa
the
mu
be
th
ac
(I
k
t
the
effect
and
the
causal
factors
over
(I)
entitie
(movi
(2)
perso
(othe
view
of
movie),
(3)
time
(the
same
person
on
repeat
expos
Attrib
wou
not
hav
pro
sam
ou
If
a
c
kn
an
o
d
h
know
the
like
con
of
pu
the
vi
on
th
sl
o
t
th
c
h
probabil
of
attributi
to
the
movie
is
maxim
when
the
indivi
enjoy
only
coul
avo
bum
into
the
vic
or
th
ch
w
u
cour
of
acti
that
wo
be
les
da
On
the
other
hand,
if
individ
likes
all
movie
(that
is,
his
or
her
respo
to
attribute
of
the
viewer
(for
examp
amultip
m
cultist
In
other
words
in
the
multi
ovie
1986
Prui
and
{ns
198
A
cpr
in
th
ar
on
is
th
m
instance
case
(that
1<;
where
there
are
data
points
availa
causa
is
while the relation
between
causal
inferences
and the organism's
responses
processes, on the other hand, refer to 'so what?'; that is, given a causal inference,
what are its implications for future thought and action? Attributional processes thus
processes,
may
therefore
The attribution
be considered
process:
a cognitive
explaining
functionalism.
in producing
a given effect is discounted if other plausible causes are also present'
p.
likely to receive a dispositional attribution for stealing a can of food than is a well-
(Kelley,
of differences
shoplifting behaviour, specifically poverty-induced
attribution 'he or she is a kleptomaniac'.
(p. 21). However, he and others certainly
but also of congruence.
1973,
.
to facilitate
the target
than possible
to the person
judging
process and likens the ascription of
(for example,
he or she is easily
pleased)
or to the perceived properties of the entity (it is a good movie). Kelley (1967) reasons
that the responsible
factor is primarily
determined
by examining
the covariation
of
of enjoyment to the entity rather than to the person (or self) is more likely if the
individual responds differentially to movies, if the response to t\;lis movie is consistent
over time, and if the response agrees with the social consensus of others. Thus, the
that movie, he or she enjoys it on repeated occasions,
facilitates
stealing).
principle
refers
costs, sacrifices,
1973, p. 114). For example,
to
or
a shoplifter
surveillance was obviously high than if done in a store with no apparent protection
against shoplifting.
Other early attribution researchers focused more specifically on the conditions
Davis,
1965; Jones and McGillis,
1976) identified
a number
of variables
that influence
likely consequences of the action, (2) had the necessary abilities, knowledge and/or
means to control the action, (3) had other possible courses of action available which
the slide at school, resulting in a broken arm, the attribution that the transgressor
is an aggressive perSon is less likely if the attributor believes that the child did not
and others also like the movie.
to the entity is not distinctive), and if no one else likes this particular movie (that
is, there is low consensus), then the person or others would ascribe the enjoyment
under
is to be attributed
when
'the augmentation
to be constraints,
have
is the foundation of the attribution
differences
(Kelley,
poverty
predictions
rather
(for example
logic-based
enjoyment
rules
various
covariation
with general
be otherwise'
hunger, dilutes the dispositional
These
concerned
behaviour
to inhibit the target behaviour.
Specifically,
the familiar idea that when there are known
actor than it would
more
/297
to test whether this person shoplifts a lot or seldom, whether he or she does so only
in this particular store, or in others, and so on. In such cases, the attibutor acts much
more like an intuitive psychologist (Ross and Anderson, 1982), using prior beliefs
and knowledge about various factors that influence behaviour to make an inference.
appears
recognition
attribution
attributed to the factor that covaries with the effect. In these multiple instance cases,
then, the attributor acts (according to Kelley) much like an intuitive statistician.
There are times, however, when attributions are made for an event in which the
events
Early models
in the field of nonsocial or thing perception'
and
many
process,'
Personality
and Bernard Weiner
confirmed
Craig Anderson
been
296/
circumstances
(see
Kelley
and
Michela,
1980).
However,
to be resolved (see, for example, Hewstone and Jaspers,
complex
issues
remain
1987; Hilton and Slugoski,
is,
there
is
little
process
to
these
proces
model
A
s
probl
is
that
econ
the
attri
que
Wh
ma
sel
fo
in
se
and
all
of
the
thre
stag
In
ch'
th
ev
of
be
tu
d
l
a
date
a
h
self
ma
cha
igh
it
as
a
p
o
a
f
a
r
u
A
n
of
research
have,
in
umber
recent
years,
propos
more
detail
proce
mode
(for
exam
'She
is
goi
to
go
ou
wi
me
wh
I
he
ag
s
i
n
s
of
how
people
make
attribut
The
specifi
details
and
partic
doma
of
alrea
com
to
som
els
l
se
o
m
applicat
vary
conside
but
severa
comm
featur
are
emerg
We
will
char
sam
turn
as
a
c
rej
In
fo
le
th
mention
some
these
in
this
section
primar
becau
they
bear
on
other
issue
ques
afte
bein
dow
for
d
a
h
se
m
w
b
l
to
cons
a
v
of
rela
ada
ca
ari
ca
(s
a
'
I
D
som
beh
mis
or
wa
she
pre
co
an
r
quickly,
spontan
with
little
or
no
effort,
somet
even
witho
awar
from
mem
fair
pos
ins
an
se
(s
as
'I
re
a
c
of
goo
date
last
mo
I
a
pre
go
at
ge
m
al
L
selfmal
wou
typ
con
les
ad
ca
(
'May
I
a
not
attr
and
ne
m
ins
an
se
(s
'
rem
gett
turn
dow
las
mo
I
d
kn
ho
to
g
o
w
wom
At
the
pro
res
sta
the
th
qu
di
in
anxiousl
may
immedi
lead
to
the
attribu
that
this
is
an
anxio
perso
sets
prod
by
hig
ver
low
sel
ind
ca
pr
v
d
The
addition
(discou
inform
that
the
person
is
discus
anxie
outc
The
self
on
wi
ten
to
be
ve
op
w
t
low
selfone
wil
ten
to
be
ve
pe
Not
that
latt
two
cog
ma
al
o
f
q
a
sfeatures
A
emergin
feature
econd
is
that
proces
a
m
one
(for
ulti
and
outs
of
awa
tho
the
pre
re
re
m
c
1988;
Trope,
1986).
Differe
proces
are
carried
out
at
d
stage
The
iffer
Still
ano
com
fea
of
ne
ap
to
th
at
p
appa
in
som
the
pre
exa
is
an
in
r
u
t
b
e
h
of
the
situatio
the
relative
enduri
catego
schem
of
the
unli
thos
foll
ear
mo
the
att
pr
w
n
k
t
same
interper
bump
to
be
charac
as
either
an
intent
shove
or
an
attri
are
not
ma
in
a
h
or
cu
va
is
T
i
a
s
unintent
jostle.
The
attribut
typical
or
easily
access
categ
schem
Finally,
prior
expecta
about
the
actor
can
lead
the
same
slap
on
the
back
to
basic
attributi
questio
is
framed
and
relevan
data
are
broug
to
mind
and
some
are
analysed
for
fit
with
various
attribu
possib
(cf.
Ande
Slush
1986;
Kruglan
1980).
These
stages
too
are
of
interes
to
perso
resea
How
are
presum
depen
agdeal
on
the
reat
individu
past
experie
That
is,
people
may
differ
in
kinds
Figu
ILl
The
attr
pro
Craig Anderson
298/
and Bernard Weiner
have little to say about how attributions
Personality and attribution
are actually made (cf. Hansen, 1985). That
attributions people make often depart significantly from these logic-based predictions
(cf. Nisbett and Ross, 1980).
Recent advances
of interest to personality theorists.
One increasingly agreed-upon feature is that attributions
are frequently
information
seem
to
that they retrieve
provide
a common
from memory
jumping-off
or seek in the situation
point
for
the
analysis.
1299
to address
Thus,
the
self-esteem
issues are relevant, as are any personality variables that influence self-beliefs,
memories, or images (see Brown, 1988).
Indeed, variables such as self-esteem may influence the attribution process at any
made
(for example, Gilbert et al., 1988; Uleman, 1987; Wong and Weiner, 1981). It is
almost as if the process of characterizing an action or event automatically ties the
actor to the action or event. Such spontaneous correspondent inferences about the
actor can be modified by other situational cues, but this correction process requires
additional cognitive capacity (Gilbert et al., 1988). So, observing a person behaving
topics (for example, sexual fantasies) has the predicted discounting
attributions only if the attributor is not otherwise cognitively busy.
example,
Anderson,
1983 a, b, 1985;
Anderson
and Slusher,
effect on
1986; Gilbert
et al.,
resources
than simple characterization
(cf. Gilbert
et al.,
1988). Figure
earliest task, mentioned above, is characterizing (that is, perceiving and interpreting)
the event. Such characterizations depend upon the event, but also upon the contextual
this rough sequence of events in the attribution process.
attributor,
memories,
may
also
and the expectancies
playa
role.
For
of the attributor.
example,
whereas others characterize
some
people
Contextual
see personal
features can lead the
affronts
and styles
brought
to the attribution
situation
11.1 displays
by the attributor.
That is,
everywhere,
even blatant personal attacks as constructive
criticism.
Event
be characterized as a friendly gesture or an aggressive act.
Other stages certainly include some type of problem formulation
type of information
integration
of cause seen as potentially
or problem
resolution
stage,
relevant to the present situation,
where
characterization
..
Problem
..
formulation
stage, where the
the salient
data
and in the kinds of
1. Spontaneous
2. Little or no effort
3. Without awareness
4. Little cognitive
capacity required
1. Usually spontaneous
2. Little effort
3. Usually without
awareness
4. Some cognitive
capacity required
Problem
resolution
1. Usually spontaneous
2. Little effort
3. Usually without
awareness
4. Some cognitive
capacity
required
in
a
v
of
sett
(see
rev
ari
by
Bm
19
M
an
R
1
T
importan
contribu
from
persona
theoris
(or
from
social
types
who
think
com
gam
attr
the
win
to
sk
an
ef
th
lo
to
.b
l
but
lack
of
imp
to
stu
low
ab
ef
(B
1
prove
to
be
highly
relevan
to
the
unders
of
person
We
will
focus
on
of
caus
attri
The
mo
obv
po
m
un
s
devi
used
to
mak
the
ind
app
fav
in
th
ey
o
T
The
hedonic
bias
(or
error)
is
also
known
as
the
self-se
attribu
bias,
egoenhance
ego-def
and
beneff
The
conce
refers
to
peop
a
s
dea
esp
hoo
wh
in
fro
of
a
j
Th
ar
ob
ur
m
tendency
to
take
more
credit
for
success
than
respon
for
failur
It
is
presu
that
this
pattern
of
ascripti
maxim
pleasu
linked
with
succe
and
they
are
mos
irre
to
und
ho
pe
co
to
a
coul
acco
for
som
of
the
sel
asc
It
al
f
t
occa
reve
self
pa
(fo
ex
R
e
a
1
i
causality
In
our
view,
the
key
to
unders
this
pheno
is
to
distin
som
who
acc
per
bla
for
fai
or
w
i
en
m
s
w
on
attri
that
peo
pre
be
to
be
tru
w
n
d
t
A
s
pos
me
eco
has
alr
in
h
b
Many
persona
theorist
have
conten
that
we
are
motiv
to
see
ourse
ascr
whi
exte
asc
for
fai
m
se
re
t
outlined
by
Kelley
and
the
presum
rationa
of
the
attribu
proce
the
hedo
inter
ascr
The
fac
tha
thi
ass
is
w
s
b
r
d
u
e
rationali
as
well
as
rationa
Dynam
orient
psych
embr
this
phenom
Three
questio
can
be
raised
with
regard
to
hedon
biasin
(I)
A
t
mec
hird
pro
to
acc
for
he
bi
re
o
p
The
existenc
of
asattribu
elf-ser
pattern
has
been
amply
demo
3001 Craig Anderson
Personality
and Bernard Weiner
like personality theorists). This contribution not only gives us better insight into how
attributions are made, but also provides a major locus for individual difference effects.
Key phenomena
related
to the attribution
three such phenomena: the hedonic bias, the actor-observer
related individual differences.
Zuckerman,
1979). For example, prototypical
studies in
contexts have revealed that: in athletic settings, players in a
effect, and process-
Johnson et af., 1964); and in gambling situations, following a loss but not a win,
gamblers search for possible external reasons (Gilovich, 1983). Similar findings have
also been observed in the political arena. For example, politicians ascribe victories
to personal characteristics but losses to party label (Kingdon, 1967).
Three mechanisms have been proposed to account for the observed hedonic biasing
biases is that the individual wants to 'appear good'. That is, attributions are conscious
bias
are obvious motivational
minimizes the pain generated by failure. Hence, the hedonic bias is one manifestation
of the underlying pleasure-pain
principle of personality and motivation, most often
associated with Freudian thinking and philosophers such as Bentham. Other hedonic
attribution patterns are also possible, such as ascribing success to permanent (stable)
factors and failure to temporary or unstable causes. However, differences in the
perceived locus of causality (internal or external to the actor) have been the focus
of attention when examining hedonic or motivational influences on perceived
clearly between the potential functional consequences of such 'self-serving' biases
and the causal processes involved. Throughout this debate there has been a strong
tendency to reason teleologically-to
assume that because the functional consquences
of a self-serving pattern of attributions is motivationally relevant the causal process
must be motivationally driven. Such reasoning is faulty, though motivational factors
may playa role.
in a positive light. But Heider (1958) first applied this principle to the formation
of causal ascriptions, suggesting that the perceived reasons for an event or outcome
tend to 'fit the wishes' of the person. In opposition to the cognitive antecedents
bias intimates
that causal
the idea of a self-serving
/301
(Snyder et af., 1976; see review in Mullen and Riordan, 1988); in school
environments, teachers ascribe improved performance of studcnts to good teaching,
process
Several key phenomena discovered by attribution researchers have provided fertile
ground for the development and testing of attribution models. These phenomena also
The hedonic
and Levi, 1982;
achievement-related
at Jd attribution
beliefs
are also determined
bias, and a large experimental
by 'irrational'
literature
forces,
emerged
or by
examining
Is it true?, (2) What accounts for such biases?, and (3) What effects might this have
on personality functioning?
reasons for a homicide suspect denying responsibility
reasons for a politician claiming credit for an improved
to voters. Although impression
management
processes
for
national economy, especially
are in themselves
interesting,
that they believe to be accurate. For this reason, most research of self-serving biases
has attempted to assess people's true beliefs. Inasmuch as experimental investigations
of biasing have taken place in the presence of others, though, impression management
one assumes
that the attributor
believes
success. Because the main theoretical
impression
management
position
that his or her public
and empirical
will think
better
of
focus of this debate has been
further.
is in service of the pleasure-pain principle. It is ego-enhancing to take credit for
success rather than to ascribe success externally, and it is ego-defensive to place
fault externally rather than on the self. Such a motivational interpretation of selfserving ascriptions assumes that attributions influence emotions (see review in Weiner,
1986). That is, internal ascriptions for success enhance self-esteem more than external
not confirm that self-serving biases are caused by motivational factors, though. The
ego-defensive consequences of self-serving biases provide no evidence that a desire
or need to defend one's ego produces the biases, just as the lung-cancer consequences
of smoking provide no evidence that a desire to die produces smoking behaviour.
of rational inference making (see Miller and Ross, 1975). It has been suggested that
The
self
bia
and
the
pro
un
pr
h
s
will
tend
to
result
in
an
interna
ascript
inasmu
as
the
behav
is
consi
view
of
the
and
pos
mo
sta
are
ne
fo
ad
a
f
with
the
past.
On
the
other
hand,
failure
is
incons
with
prior
outco
and
mec
The
abs
of
suc
a
s
bi
or
a
r
ys
b
i
w
e
n
resp
is
den
for
bu
acc
fo
fa
m
c
a
rseems
A
argume
of
elated
cogniti
that
some
errors
in
causa
ascrip
may
disru
in
dail
fun
and
pre
un
so
de
p
result
from
ignoran
or
misuse
of
inform
Specif
succe
is
cong
to
covary
with
what
we
are
trying
to
do,
where
failur
does
not.
patte
will
allo
peo
to
hol
po
be
ab
th
t
s
a
h
In
sum,
there
are
two
major
positio
on
what
produ
the
self-s
patte
not
true
Som
of
tho
bel
ma
sel
A
u
m
n
of
attributi
so
often
seen
in
the
laborat
and
inever
intera
The
main
strength
of
the
motivat
is
that
it
is
so
intuiti
appea
weaknes
is
that
it
actually
provide
no
mecha
for
its
operat
The
main
stren
diag
thei
abil
For
exa
a
s
m
p
th
n
tu
b
a
a
Recently
one
of
us
has
attemp
to
integra
the
two
positi
by
show
how
as
alco
may
in
som
ins
be
ins
by
a
s
s
e
via
purely
cognitiv
mechan
operati
at
latter
stages
depic
in
Figur
ILl
(Anders
and
Slusher
1986).
Specif
expec
prior
belie
The
noti
that
the
cau
per
of
ac
an
ob
m
s
y
diffe
is
also
trac
to
an
ins
He
(1
H
s
'T
p
t
To
be
more
concret
conside
a
p
makin
an
attribu
for
erson
an
interp
to
attri
his
own
rea
to
the
ob
wo
[th
re
o
a
.
failure
that
is
either
highly
ego-inv
or
not
at
all
ego-in
To
be
highl
pers
cha
[of
tha
oth
(p.
15
Th
as
w
e
ego-invo
means
that
the
situatio
is
seen
by
the
person
as
releva
to
many
abilities
in
domain
will
be
brough
to
bear
on
curren
attrib
quest
(p.
80).
Bot
the
acto
and
the
obs
are
the
pr
to
b
i
esteem),
then
the
current
failure
will
be
as
fairly
atypic
and
attrib
to
unstable
or
externa
factors.
Howev
if
ego-in
is
low,
that
mean
that
The
answ
to
'wh
que
ho
ar
as
d
a
f
'I
did
it
beca
I
w
pro
wh
ob
pe
as
th
p
c
abilities
will
come
to
mind,
and
the
attribu
analys
will
result
in
the
perso
takin
(for
exam
'He
did
it
bec
he
is
ag
H
a
q
g
This
same
type
of
analysi
accoun
for
the
occasi
findin
that
sel
f-attr
motivati
variable
seem
to
have
their
impac
on
attribu
via
their
effec
on
Foll
the
Jon
and
Nis
pu
(1
posw
l
302/
Craig Anderson
Personality
and Bernard Weiner
most individuals (and particularly the oft-tested college students) have had general
success in life and expect further success. If success is anticipated, then actual success
thus promotes an entity (external) attribution. In sum, the self-serving bias can be
explained by using principles of attribution proposed by Kelley (1967) without
postulating 'irrational forces'.
with our intentions
and efforts,
whereas
failure occurs
in spite of them. Thus,
success
position
is that proposed
mechanisms
(such
as the effects
of prior
/303
implications for personality. The functional outcome of such a bias is the maintenance
of a positive affective state for the individual. It is generally accepted that a positive
persistence toward goals. Thus, this is a very central ego mechanism, deserving more
study within the larger framework of other possible self-enhancing and self-protective
(Kuiper,
1978).
The self-serving
of the cognitive
aile} attribution
pattern
can also exact
a price.
Most
obviously,
sometimes
the
incur considerable financial and emotional costs in pursuing an impossible career
goal kept active by self-serving attributions. Further, Jones and Berglas (1978) have
uncovered a phenomenon in which people create situations so that failure is non-
expectations on perceptions of covariation) have been successfully tested.
important
motivational
variables
(such as ego-involvement)
can have their impact on attributions
and relevant information brought to bear on a particular attribution question (at the
problem formulation stage) are influenced by motivational features via a featurematching process. For example, if the current situation is perceived as being a very
important interpersonal one, the attributor accesses past occasions in which he or
she had to perform in important interpersonal situations (that is, matching the features
important and interpersonal). The attribution selected during the problem-resolution
stage depends on the information collected at this earlier stage.
aspects
of his or her life.
Thus,
much
information
about
past performances
and
If the person has been successful in the past (for example, has normal to high self-
relatively
more
responsibility
display a stronger
what
information
for the failure.
'self-serving'
or beliefs
(See Anderson
pattern than do attributions
are salient
or brought
to mind.
and Slusher,
so that
poor
performance
on
the
exam
tells
nothing
about
behaviours
actual
such
Although it is not well-documented,
and one wonders about the pervasiveness of
this phenomenon (after all, most individuals prefer success to failure), the analysis
by Jones and Berglas could provide novel insights into some apparently dysfunctional
behaviours (see Arkin and Baumgardner,
1985; Berglas, 1989).
The actor-observer
perspective
and formalized by Jones and Nisbett (1971). Their frequently cited contention is
that: 'There is a pervasive tendency for actors to attribute their actions to situational
requirements whereas observers tend to attribute the action to stable dispositions'
the
the person sees the situation as relatively unrelated to other aspects of his or her
life, past or present. Thus, little information about past performances and related
exam,
ability. Jones and Berglas (1978) also reason that self-destructive
same
attributional
of the perspective
endeavour
- attempting
of the perceiver:
to explain
some observed
behaviour.
actors see the situation as causal (for example,
1986.)
to others. Basically,
be addressed regarding the hypothesized effects of viewer perspective on attributions:
(I) Is is true?, (2) If true, then why?, and (3) What are the implications of this disparity
for personality?
conducte
to
attempt
to
verify
the
sugges
actor-o
attribu
dispa
(see
Tay
and
Fisk
197
As
act
pe
ty
fo
o
t
s
h
(see
review
in
Monson
and
Snyder
1977).
Typica
among
the
types
of
inves
They
asked
subjects
conside
why
they
had
chosen
their
girlfri
as
oppo
were
made
the
latter
than
in
the
former
judgm
(for
examp
'He
is
the
kind
of
person
who
likes.
..
).
responsi
for
their
own
behavio
and
the
conseq
of
their
action
than
avai
to
typi
obs
pro
the
sam
ty
no
p
o
from
sascriptio
a
attributi
so
that
ituation
some
reporte
findin
regard
actorNote
that
the
sou
of
bot
phe
lie
in
th
c
a
o
to
the
attri
at
the
tim
the
attr
are
be
m
O
a
t
f
i
h
'I
like
tall
girls',
which
is
a
p
attribu
In
their
review
erson
Mons
well
with
attr
in
Fig
11
On
in
t
Clean
tests
of
the
general
version
of
either
the
situati
or
the
accur
hypo
Wha
con
do
the
act
di
h
f
p
o
are
impossi
To
show
that
people
genera
make
relativ
more
situat
attributi
for
their
own
behavio
and
relativ
more
person
attrib
for
the
expe
othe
to
disp
sam
beh
wh
in
th
sa
si
P
for
the
sample.
The
same
problem
exist
in
testing
the
genera
propo
that
actor
are
more
accurate
in
attribut
than
are
observ
An
appro
unive
Evid
sup
this
ded
em
fro
wo
re
to
th
so
f
of
behavio
must
be
random
sample
we
would
have
to
assess
the
attrib
actors
and
observe
and
we
would
then
have
to
assess
the
accur
of
those
over
the
com
of
the
ow
res
th
is
p
th
t
attributi
impossi
of
even
creatin
approp
unive
ofbeh
own
beha
is
rela
mo
typ
of
wh
ot
st
a
d
frequent
make
more
accurat
attribu
than
do
observ
but
not
alway
Two
main
hypothe
have
been
advanc
to
accoun
for
the
sugge
attrib
observer
repeated
interact
with
actors
in
the
same
restric
settin
wher
high
variabili
across
situatio
This
accoun
fits
in
well
with
the
attrib
proce
on
othe
beh
ma
res
in
a
h
of
m
ju
o
a
certainly
produce
differen
formul
of
attribu
proble
and
may
even
Ifl
sum
acto
attr
dif
im
th
ac
gs
A
sexplana
for
econd
the
hypoth
differe
betwe
actor
and
304/
Craig Anderson
Personality
and Bernard Weiner
is a great deal of evidence that behaviour
was a series
of studies
conducted
by Nisbett,
to the reasons for an acquaintance's
Caputo,
Legant,
and Maracek
choice of a girlfriend.
(1973).
More trait attributions
do observers'
(p. 92).
Furthermore,
at times
it is difficult
to distinguish
a person
differences are ambiguous. For example, choosing a girlfriend because she is tall
implies a situation (entity) attribution, yet this is perhaps indistinguishable from an
and Snyder (1977) agree that the attributions of actors and observers differ. However,
they argue instead that actors are more accurate in their causal inferences than are
observers.
behaviour of others would require an adequate definition of the universe of self and
other behaviours, a random sample from that universe, and generated attributions
disparities
between
actors
and observers.
First,
actors
know
more
about
themselves
and their personal histories than do observers. Similarly, it is argued that they have
monitored themselves in a variety of situations and therefore recognize the variety
of responses that they have displayed in these environments.
behavioural
sketched
influence
observers,
consistency
in Figure
is likely,
they
These
differences
11.1.
the characterization
also first mentioned
have
less
information
between
actors
Conversely, because
-
about
behavioural
and observers
would
while
observers
viewed
the
environment
from
the
perspective
of the
attributions.
problem-formulation
stage
can
influence
the
attribution.
What
becomes
available
in that stage varies as a function of perspective, motivational features of the situation,
and a variety of cognitive factors.
functioning and for issues germane to personality psychology? For one thing, if actors
perceived their behaviour to be situationally determined, then they would tend to
behaviour would therefore be perceived as normative. This has implications for underrecognition of personal pathology and the uniqueness and distinctiveness of the self.
effect'.
For example,
Ross,
Greene,
and House
(1977)
report
that students
is actually the case (see Marks and Miller, 1987; Mullen et al., 1985).
Another consequence of the actor-observer
differences described is that if
observers perceive that behaviour is person-determined,
then the situational
determinants of others' behaviours are discounted. The tendency to overattribute
behaviour to the person and underestimate the influence of the environment is captured
by 'the fundamental attribution error' (Ross and Anderson,
1982), or the
'correspondence bias' (Jones and Davis, 1965). For example, it has been reported
that even if individuals are forced to write an essay from a particular vantage point,
the writer is thought to have the opinion expressed in the essay (Jones and Harris,
1967; but see Wright and Wells, 1988). Failure to recognize the situational constraints
with various
social
prejudices
against
disadvantaged
groups
being
a societal-level
example.
process.
by Heider
to what is visually salient
actor. Given these conditions, the 'usual' actor-observer
difference in causal
inference was reversed. Similarly, Eisen (1979) showed that observers given the
information available to the typical actor subjects produce the typical 'self-serving'
pattern of attributions. She also showed that actor subjects given the information
consensus
coupled with the extant research, leads us to conclude that actors frequently make
more situational attributions than do observers, but not always, and that actors
/305
cues around them; that is, the situational constraints. For the observer, though, the
actor is focal. Hence, there is differential salience of potential causal factors between
actors and observers. In one early study supporting this line of reasoning, Storms
(1973) videotaped and replayed a conversation so that actors viewed themselves as
respondents,
Unfortunately, such results are not always replicable. Monson and Snyder (1977)
conclude that 'in a variety of circumstances,
actors attribute to themselves more
is attributed
and attribution
(1958),
relates
to focus of attention.
There
to a theory of personality
akin to that espoused
by contingency-reinforcement
The
also
pres
evid
tha
sco
on
thi
sc
ar
on
w
re
t
are
more
consiste
with
the
beliefs
of
'pure'
trait
theori
These
persp
inst
of
Cac
and
Pe
(1
an
Fl
et
a
(
r
1
differen
have
been
suggest
to
be
one
reason
why
person
psych
have
to
wha
spec
cau
asc
wi
be
ma
Th
in
d
m
psycholo
of
social
and
persona
psycho
can
be
carrie
furthe
An
in
the
study
anxiety
contras
traits
and
states.
This
distinc
has
been
justif
The
mor
dom
ind
dif
ap
at
th
p
on
aIn
v
empiric
criteria
employ
ariety
in
test
assess
For
exam
meas
or
type
of
cau
wil
hav
or
hav
had
an
eff
A
w
v
o
s
a
a
u
addition
state
indicato
should
change
more
in
differe
situat
than
those
has
prod
littl
adv
in
und
ho
at
ar
m
N
t
As
already
discusse
consist
over
time
and
lack
of
distin
have
been
less,
any
adeq
mo
of
the
attr
pr
m
b
ab
to
a
fo
e
identifie
by
Kelley
(1967)
as
criteria
for
person
causal
On
the
other
hand
relia
indi
diff
fou
in
att
sty
T
l
lo
i
inconsis
over
time
and
distinct
respon
are
criteri
for
entity
causa
of
such
effe
wou
be
pro
for
sta
D
p
w
d
attri
que
Do
bri
dif
inf
to
be
o
t
q
h
They
reason:
that
is,
as
the
dep
me
w
gr
en
bo
th
so
a
t
i
We
have
suggest
that
traits
and
states
serve
people
needs
to
predic
expla
and
contr
social
behavio
The
easiest
way
to
accom
this
would
be
have
only
two
kinds
of
person
characte
first
kind
would
includ
those
that
enabl
peopl
to
predi
(e.g.,
to
seek
out
or
to
avoid
people
with
that
charac
The
secon
kind
characte
being
unstabl
over
time,
cannot
be
predic
from
past
exper
with
The
stru
of
cau
the
person,
but
may
be
control
by
manipu
the
situati
(p.
555)
To
und
the
effe
of
attr
on
the
dy
of
be
o
m
They
conclud
that
the
trait-sta
distinc
therefo
'organ
the
laype
unde
con
and
stru
of
att
O
m
t
t
s
h
h
understa
of
human
action'
(p.
555).
This
statem
certai
is
in
accor
By
type
we
mea
sets
cau
tha
sha
ke
pr
ju
as
d
t
of
furn
shar
key
fea
Fo
exa
'tri
ha
'w
h
a
'
m
effo
may
be
thou
of
as
con
a
t
of
ca
ha
yp
to
w
e
Peop
seem
to
thin
spo
in
ter
ty
an
m
Most
research
on
individ
differe
in
causal
percep
has
been
conce
dime
app
wa
the
clo
att
at
sc
f
on
dim
wor
bec
it
is
by
far
the
mo
hi
de
a
t
h
By
we
me
cer
sec
co
th
ca
b
u
t
assessin
the
need
to
explain
events
in
the
world
and
the
tenden
to
enjoy
this
type
1985
198
Con
for
exa
the
tw
ca
as
of
ap
e
two
are
sim
in
that
bot
cau
are
int
to
the
ac
H
ef
is
th
306/
Craig Anderson
theorists,
alld Bernard
whereas observers
Weiner
Personality and attribution
generally entertain naive theories of personality
that
need
pursued
the discovery
The comparison
important
distinction
of traits.
of the naive psychology
made by personality
of actors
psychologists,
of traits are expected to have higher test-retest
and observers
perhaps
/307
with the formal
most fully examined
reliability than measures of states.
for
,
cognition.
to the process, rather than to the content, of causal thinking. That is, they focus
on the likelihood of making attributions and how many will be called forth, as opposed
have only recently been proposed and have not (yet) spawned a large supporting
literature.
to the content of causal ascriptions,
or the tendency to perceive that particular causes
of traits (see Chaplin et al., 1988). Indeed, Chaplin et al. (1988) have demonstrated
that perceptions of stability, consistency, and internal causality are linked with traits,
whereas instability, inconsistency, and external causality are associated with states.
style scales have been developed and have proved useful in a variety of contexts
(Anderson et al., 1988; Feather and Tiggemann, 1984; Peterson et al., 1982; Rotter,
1966). However, to date the study of individual differences in attributional style
In sum, the trait-state
distinction finds correspondence
in the analysis of causal
attributions, and particularly in the distinction between internal and external causality.
Chaplin et al. (1988) also discuss the function or utility of the trait-state distinction.
attributional
styles
think
of different
Research in which attributional
causal
candidates
when
first formulating
the
style is treated as the result of the attribution process
-
personality
theorists'
understanding
of attribution
issues.
behavior reliably over time and situations and thus lead to social actions based on the person
The attributional
the
presumptions
Process-related
of attribution
theorists.
of attributions
process:
the results of explanations
in terms of types or in terms of dimensions
(Anderson,
1983b;
1989).
typological
and
individual differences
with attributional rather than attribution processes. However, the search for reliable
individual differences and their impact on a variety of outcome variables (such as
affect or persuasibility or expectancy change) has the potential for producing insights
into the attribution process itself.
For example, Cacioppo and Petty (1982) developed a 'need for cognition' scale
of cognitive activity. In a similar manner, Fletcher, Danilovics, Fernandez, Peterson,
and Reeder (1986) advanced an attributional complexity scale that is designed to
predict the complexity of causal ascriptions that are made for behavioural events.
inferences
directly
from
them
(Anderson,
1989).
Although
both
distinguish among causes (and causal types). Certainly two, and perhaps as many
as four, properties of causes have been identified in addition to locus (see Weiner,
which
are reported
to be salient
causes
of achievement
success
and failure.
These
of
as
more
fluctuat
over
time
than
is
aptitud
The
causes
theref
differ
in
what
that
ther
will
be
futu
fail
(as
in
ch
tas
Th
co
o
c
s
between
stability
and
stabilit
over
situati
(or
what
is
called
'glob
to
the
Red
Cro
The
firs
cal
ho
wa
to
a
c
w
r
to
d
o
e
Prio
this
reje
the
sub
att
sty
w
a
S
s
s
It
is
evident
that
some
themes
throug
the
study
of
person
dynam
are
focus
goal
expecta
A
n
of
major
theoris
includ
umbe
Atkin
Lewi
stab
attri
stat
tha
suc
wa
de
by
a
s
p
t
('som
guy
hav
it,
som
don
the
ins
ev
u
a
indi
that
stra
wa
the
ma
ou
('u
d
ta
.
Simply
knowin
how
much
an
individ
wants
to
reach
a
c
goal
is
not
suffic
ertai
informa
for
predicti
his
behavi
A
s
may
want
very
badly
tuden
to
finish
scho
attri
man
inf
su
m
le
(f
e
h
believe
that
no
amount
of
studyin
will
result
in
a
p
grade
..
A
f
stude
assin
ellow
may
share
the
same
strong
goals
and,
as
a
r
of
d
set
esult
of
past
exper
iffere
in
school,
will
have
a
h
expecta
that
studyi
will
igh
lead
to
acade
succe
.
The
goals
in
these
two
cases
are
identic
but
the
expec
differ
and
as
a
r
esul
the
behavio
of
student
is
likely
to
differ.
(p.
95)
of
succ
also
has
an
effe
on
cau
att
Th
lo
o
t
a
i
h
tend
not
to
shift
downw
and
may
actuall
increa
On
the
other
hand,
follo
unst
ascr
(su
as
bad
luc
Bu
if
ex
of
su
is
lo
th
f
is
cons
with
the
prio
bel
and
eli
a
s
at
(s
ta
l
o
on
past
occasio
will
be
expecte
to
recur.
A
s
under
these
circu
ucces
as
high
abil
wh
low
exp
fo
by
ev
a
u
ascr
(suc
as
goo
Th
low
d
t
skill
tasks).
On
the
other
hand,
if
the
causal
condit
are
perce
as
likely
to
Self
dys
bel
sy
ha
be
id
fo
m
g
or
there
may
be
uncerta
about
subseq
outcom
A
swoul
there
ucce
pers
the
reta
and
tho
low
in
sel
In
ad
w
t
a
m
~
198
We
will
exp
sev
of
the
fin
in
th
la
se
och
308/
Craig AI Iderson
and Bernard
Personality and altllbutioil
Weiner
is called 'stability'. Furthermore, effort is subject to volitional change, but aptitude
is not. That is, causes also vary in perceived controllability. Controllability and locus
are conceptually independent of causal stability. Some investigators also distinguish
In addition, others distinguish between controllability and intentionality (consider
the difference between manslaughter and murder). For empirical reasons and the
sake of brevity, our subsequent discussion of causal consequences largely ignores
the properties of globality and intentionality.
Expectancy
of success
considered
more important
and Rotter
include
or central
the expectancy
than others
of success
and constantly
among
reappear.
the determinants
One such
/309
with future expectancy is in accord with the logic of cause-effect
associatitms and
has received extensive empirical support (see review in Weiner, 1986).
It has been proposed that the stability of attributions for negative outcomes inlluence
future expectancies which, in turn, affect persistence in the face of failure. Anderson
(1983a) and Anderson and Jennings (1980) documented that there are both
dispositional and situational determinants of causal stability ascriptions that affect
persistence at an achievement-related
task (see also Anderson el al., 1988). In one
study (Anderson, 1983a), subjects engaged in telephone solicitations to donate hlood
style focused on ability and trait attributions
for interpersonal
failures
(characterological blame); others focused on lack of effort and strategic hehavioural
mistakes f()r interpersonal failures (behavioural blame). In addition, an experimental
manipulation varied the perceived cause of the rejection. The instruction eliciting
of aspiration
level (goal selection). In criticizing the approach of psychoanalytic theory to goal
seeking, Rotter and Hochreich (1975) stated:
himself
for a well paying
job.
But his past experiences
may have
led him to
experimental
There have been numerous approaches to and theories about expectancy of success
and expectancy change. One influential conception associated with Rotter and his
colleagues has linked perceived locus of control to expectancy. It is known, for
example, that following failure at a chance task (external causality), expectancies
failure at a skill task (internal causality) there are downward shifts in expectation
of future success.
In contrast to this 'focus on locus', a second attributional position contends that
the stability of a cause determines expectancy shifts. If conditions (the presence or
absence of causes) are expected to remain the same, then the outcomes experienced
Likewise,
high expectancy
change,
and vulnerable
yield
relatively
of subsequent
small
increments,
may not be expected
if any,
and
perhaps
to be repeated
decrements
success, whereas a failure need not necessarily
in the future,
in the expectancy
intensify the belief
persisted
longer
no
Given
the
after
initial
blame
than
similar to that offered in the cognitive explanation of the self-serving bias. Specifically,
if expectancy of success is high, then failure is non-confirmatory
and elicits an
alter and a self-perpetuating
outcome
high in behavioura]
subjects classified as high in characterological
blame. But in the experimental
conditions, the instructions overrode the individual difference tendencies, with
subjects given instructions that elicited unstable ascriptions making more phone calls
than those ascribing rejection to a personality trait.
There is a bi-directiona] relation between causa] ascriptions and expectancy of
success; that is, just as causal ascriptions influence subsequent expectancy, expectancy
would produce relatively large increments in the anticipation of future success, and
a failure would strengthen the belief that there will be subsequent failures (as in
then the present
those
made
failure).
manipulation,
were
calls
phone
subsequent
many
and qualify
until finding one that works'). Other studies in the series used similar dispositional
and situational independent variables.
In these studies, it was found that both the dispositional tendency and the
detined
tasks,
individuals,
females
exhibit
followed
cycle
by success
of pessimism
including
this same
psychiatric
pattern
results
in a stable
attribution
(such
is established.
rehabilitees,
of expectations
lonely,
(see
and depressed
review
in Weiner,
and
Singer
(1962).
Their
concep
was
in
part
respon
for
the
reviv
of
the
study
of
affectiv
states
in
psycho
The
concep
of
arousa
which
refers
to
(1962)
concept
They
specify
two
differe
ways
an
emoti
can
be
Figu
11.2
The
cog
pro
(S
W
et
a
1
is
linked
with
(attribu
to)
the
gun,
and
an
emotio
is
experi
The
secon
appr
For
exa
afte
rec
an
A
i
a
c
hi
n
h
r
o
i
way
an
emotion
state
can
be
initiate
is
with
the
percep
of
'unexp
arous
a
b
gam
or
bei
acc
ase
for
a
d
th
in
w
f
'h
a
I
e
Foll
the
app
of
the
ou
a
c
as
is
so
a
A
d
set
of
emo
is
gen
by
the
ch
at
E
o
'misattri
paradig
In
these
investi
subjec
may
be
provi
with
the
ascr
uni
rela
to
a
s
of
fee
Th
co
et
s
aexercise
farousal
reason
for
an
event,
alse
or
they
may
experie
arousa
but
misatt
its
sourc
For
example
in
what
is
known
as
a
t
excitat
ransfe
paradi
subje
migh
or
hear
a
l
noise
at
Time
oud
I.
They
then
experi
anoth
of
at
Time
2,
such
as
an
attracti
memb
of
the
oppos
sex.
It
has
been
as
aggressi
are
enhance
when
the
total
arousa
is
a
c
of
the
event
omp
experien
I
a
2,
given
that
activa
nd
attribu
to
only
the
Time
2
e
(see
review
in
xperien
Reisen
1983).
is
exte
attr
(su
as
tas
eas
go
lu
A
I
(1
s
few
years
this
theory
has
met
with
many
criticis
and
its
influe
has
been
great
'The
defi
of
prid
the
has
thr
pa
Th
is
(I
a
q
w
(
i
appr
and
(3)
is
jud
to
bel
to
on
(p
35
T
is
e
work
for
the
study
of
emotion
Further
in
that
framew
it
is
also
assum
that
different
affectiv
experie
further
It
was
propos
that
follow
the
outco
3101
Craig Anderson
at id Bernard
Personality
Wtliner
Emotion
/'
Outcome
I
1--7
Outcome
evaluation
1
~
plays a central role in the Schachter
/311
General positive
or negative
emotions
Certainly the study of personality and personality processes must include an analysis
of emotion. The initial attributional theory of emotion was proposed by Schachter
intensity or state of activation of an individual,
and dll/llJlJlioll
generated, one being the usual, everyday experience; the second more atypical but
responsible for a number of oft-cited research studies. In everyday emotional states,
according to Schachter and Singer, external cues trigger physiological processes and
serve as the label to which feelings are attached. For example, someone takes out
a gun, this is appraised and interpreted as a threat, arousal increases, the arousal
In an experimental setting, this can be created by having the subjects unknowingly
ingest an activating drug. The arousal theoretically generates a search to determine
the source of the arousal, given that an instigating source is not immediately evident.
Again arousal plus the attribution or inference about the arousal source then produce
an emotional state.
Perhaps the most influential research growing from this conception involved a
Causal
a similar manner, after receiving an F in a course, failing to get a hit, or being rejected
the person will experience sadness. These emotions are labelled 'outcome dependentattribution independent', for they are determined primarily by the attainment or nonattainment of a desired goal, and not by the cause of that outcome.
proposed
reported
The
that many
Schachter
emotional
and
states
Singer
cognitive approach to emotions'
(such
as sexual
formulation
'has.
(Reisenzein,
..
excitement)
become
and actions
the
most
1983, p. 239). However,
(such
influential
of increasing
complexity
enter
into the emotion
process
Causal
is depicted
in Figure
locus and self-esteem
11.2.
(pride)
Locus of causality, the dimension of ascription first introduced by Rotter and initially
thought to be linked with expectancy of success, influences self-esteem and selfworth. More specifically, successful outcomes that are ascribed to the self (such
as personality, ability, effort) result in greater self-esteem (pride) than success that
in the past
reduced. There is evidence, for example, that unexplained arousal is in itself a
negative affective state; that individuals do not necessarily search the environment
for the source of their arousal; and that arousal is not necessary for an emotional
experience. That is, 'the role of arousal in emotion has been overstated' (Reisenzein,
1983, p. 239).
Weiner, Russell, and Lerman (1978, 1979) also proposed an attributional framecognitions
attributions
and dimensions
to refine
and
of an event, there is initially a generally positive or negative reaction (a 'primitive'
emotion) based on the perceived success or failure of that outcome (the 'primary'
in self-statements
such
as : 'I succeeded
because
I (am
smart;
worked
hard;
etc.).'
The relation between self-ascription and pride is directly relevant to the hedonic
bias, examined in an earlier section of this chapter. Indeed, the basic premise of
hedonic bias research is that internal attributions for goal attainment, and external
attributions for non-attainment of a goal, enhance and protect self-esteem. Thus,
the documentation of the self-serving attributional bias can also be considered as
evidence supporting the relation between locus of causality and self-esteem. In
addition, a variety of excuses, rationalization,
self-handicapping
strategies, etc.,
document clearly that self-esteem is a function of causal locus (see review by Snyder
and Higgins, 1988).
A
v
of
salient
emotion
are
ariety
associa
with
the
conce
of
contro
or
(see
reviews
in
Weiner
1986).
Figu
11.3
The
attr
pro
(p.
26).
Thus,
if
guilt
is
experie
then
percei
self-re
seem
to
Shame
is
often
indistin
from
guilt
in
that
both
'invol
negat
selfto
arise
from
uncontr
causes,
such
as
lack
of
aptitu
This
contr
with
.example
T
four
affects
examin
above
are
he
interre
in
compl
ways.
Ange
for
The
esse
of
exp
the
wh
th
es
is
th
b
i
serves
as
a
c
to
others
that
a
m
wrong
ue
has
been
comm
Henc
oral
if
it
is
accepted
the
targette
individ
will
experi
guilt.
Pity,
on
the
other
to
ente
afte
som
eve
has
occ
At
pr
(e
c
Thus
far,
outcome
emotio
of
happin
and
sadne
have
been
exam
as
well
as
the
attributi
emotio
of
pride,
anger,
pity,
guilt,
and
sham
The
dimensi
associa
yet
to
be
discus
involv
causa
stabil
Reca
part
way
the
acti
is
car
ou
(th
is,
a
d
co
T
r
i
in
som
part
per
wh
ma
pr
th
in
o
o
m
In
sum,
attributi
theorist
have
been
concer
with
both
the
emoti
proce
One
fina
poin
to
con
con
the
di
cu
o
t
a
t
h
and
specific
emotion
Two
process
have
been
propo
one
focus
on
the
been
exam
For
exa
ang
ten
to
ev
re
i
th
w
n
or
goin
tow
task
or
oth
(se
Tr
19
Ste
to
p
Personality
and Bernard Weiner
Causal controllability and social emotions
have done otherwise'.
These
include anger,
/
pity, guilt, and shame
Anger is elicited by the violation of an 'ought' or 'should'. Thus, anger is an
attribution of blame (see Averill, 1983). Most instances of anger in everyday life
involve a voluntary and unjustified act, such as telling a lie, or a potentially avoidable
accident.
In contrast to the linkage between controllability and anger, uncontrollable causes
are associated with pity and sympathy. Thus, another's loss of a loved one because
of an accident or illness, or failure by another because of a physical handicap, are
prevalent situations that elicit pity.
In their review of the guilt literature, Wicker, Payne, and Morgan (1983)
concluded: 'In general, guilt is said to follow from acts that violate ethical norms
. . . or moral values. Guilt is accompanied by feelings of personal responsibility'
be a necessary
antecedent
(Hoffman,
/313
1~
one 'could
Success
I
expectancy
1
T
)
1
Performance
Motivation
quality
I
~
whether
wid atlliLJUtiufI
Attribution
for
event outcome
I~
Craig Anderson
Affect
312/
I
1975).
Behav;our
evaluations that are painful, tense, agitating, real, present, and depressing' (Wicker
et al., 1983, p. 33). However, shame and the related affect of humiliation seems
guilt,
which
hand, conveys
is particularly
that the person
different'.
Hence,
and humiliation.
Causal
if accepted
elicited
'could
by lack of effort
not have done otherwise'
from others,
stability and time-related
in achievement
pity is a stimulus
contexts.
and is 'fundamentally
for feelings
of shame
Personality and motivational theorists including Lewin, Rotter, and Atkinson presume
that behaviour is a function of the likelihood of attaining a desired goal (the subjective
expectancy of success) and the affective or incentive value associated with that goal.
governed by hedonic concerns and there is an attempt to maximize expected utility.
Inasmuch as causal ascriptions influence both expectancy of success and affect,
attributional analyses have provided a theoretical vehicle to interpret the dynamics
of action. Figure 11.3 presents an obviously simplified model of the attributional
process. Note that between event occurrence and attribution are all the attribution
processes discussed in the first part of this chapter.
Because the model is circular, one can begin at any point. It makes most sense
emotions
problem
that causal stability in part determines
future expectancy
of success and failure. Thus,
emotions
such as hope and fear, which are influenced
by future anticipations
are
guided by perceived
causal stability (see review in Weiner,
1986).
fail
concept of arousal, the other eschewing the need for arousal and assuming that
cognitions are sufficient antecedents of emotional states. Both theories are able to
address very prevalent human emotions that lie at the very essence of personality.
formulation,
problem
resolution)
lead
to a particular
causal
understanding.
This, in turn, influences expectancy and affective reactions, both of which influence
what might generically be called motivation. Motivation, of course, includes both
strength of approach or avoidance (that is, an energizing component), and also the
to do
Karen
so.
Horney
(1937),
going against
others;
guilt and pity tend to elicit 'restitution',
withdraw
and
retreat.
Again
using
the
vocabu
of
Horne
a
p
who
feels
erso
shame
is
incl
ined
to
go
away
from
others.
Note,
then,
that
each
of
these
affec
bring
it)
they
will
be
like
to
com
it
via
th
pi
or
so
T
(act
and
psy
fro
the
ac
se
with
subj
pop
ran
ele
stu
w
a
p
One
question
that
arises
from
these
consid
conce
the
role
of
expec
in
motivati
Should
we
expect
a
f
direct
effect
of
airly
succe
on
Cha
Dyc
197
Dw
an
Go
19
W
an
L
1
Cov
and
Om
(19
for
ex
ex
th
at
a
a
mediate
by
their
effects
on
emotio
Becau
there
is
no
clear
answe
and
we
see
subs
perf
of
stu
wh
de
m
e
f
no
easy
way
to
tease
these
effects
apart,
we
decide
to
maint
the
some
Lac
of
effo
asc
we
mo
hig
co
w
g
w
lo
u
inelegan
represen
shown
in
Figure
11.3.
hum
was
neg
rel
wi
su
sc
Evid
from
the
and
oth
stu
of
ac
(s
W
1
f
a
usefully
applied
to
underst
and
in
some
cases
treat,
a
w
range
of
perso
ide
achi
attr
sty
Sim
m
w
re
th
s
(for
example
Dweck
and
Goetz,
1977),
variou
everyd
proble
in
living
such
will
cert
req
ass
of
an
tra
in
th
sk
ne
fo
health
(for
example
Peterso
et
al.,
1988).
The
most
extens
work
has
been
done
nega
imp
of
ma
hig
mo
le
do
in
w
t
p
we
turn
now
to
those
problem
The
key
question
in
most
of
this
researc
has
been
how
peopl
respo
to
failur
depr
(see
Sw
et
al.
19
fo
a
m
re
T
l
a
aoutcome
to
g
extent
upon
the
attribut
reat
made
for
the
failure
The
perso
will
proba
that
as
exp
the
latt
two
pro
are
u
li
to
a
n
attribute
to
a
l
of
effort
or
ack
prepara
then
we
may
expec
a
f
posit
airly
hopeful.
Because
the
causes
are
interna
and
contro
the
perso
may
exper
guilt
and
may
perceiv
anger
on
the
part
of,
say,
paren
and
teach
High
expectat
of
future
success
along
with
hopefu
and
guilt,
often
result
in
an
increase
in
motivat
On
the
other
hand,
consid
seque
if
the
initia
failur
is
attribute
to
lack
ability,
which
is
stable,
uncon
The
initia
affects
of
sadness
and
frustra
will
be
presen
of
cours
A
fIn
num
of
orm
res
stu
on
th
A
re
hab
cond
the
pas
few
yea
nu
re
of
th
to
314/
Craig Anderson
and Bernard Weiner
Personality and all!iiJutioll 1315
with it a programme f()r action. Thus, affects summarize the past, providing an overall
evaluation for what has occurred, and they also prescribe for the'future. Hence,
they seem to provide the glue between thinking and acting, or between attributions
and behaviour.
humiliation.
If parents and teachers,
thoughts
affects
and
as shown
in Figure
11.3, or are expectancy
effects
on motivation
students
of the attributional
model outlined in Figure
related
Included
in this
list are
11.3 (or some version of it) has been
problems
related
to achievement
strivings
review)
loneliness,
behaviour
and shyness (for example,
Anderson
and Arnoult,
1985
pattern (for example,
Rhodewalt
et al., 1988), marital
distress (for example,
Baucom
Herzberger,
1987), aggression
with
achievement
and
with
et al., 1989),
(for example,
various
failing
problems
self-esteem
Zillmann,
in living
(for example,
Tennen and
1978), and even long-term
(especially
depression),
demonstrate
a mid-term
so
that
can
is lacking,
in achievement
reduce
many
exam
(for
achievement
or eliminate
however.
attributions.
result
in withdrawal
example,
Andrews
and
Debus,
1978;
More
For
problems
the observed
work
many
is needed
achievement
are
related
problems.
on how
to
Systematic
to effect
problems,
a maladaptive
intervention
long-term
effective
change
intervention
performance in conjunction with attribution training designed to keep motivation
levels appropriately high. Another topic needing investigation concerns the possible
truly does
lack the requisite
Depression,
Achievement
often
were most positively correlated
with shame. In addition,
guilt and high
were positively
related to performance
on the next exam, whereas
interventions
research
as depression,
a, b), Type-A
and
model
The attributional
problems.
strivings,
entirely
attributions
expectancy
Applications
achievement
(or foster
Various aspects of these scenarios have been confirmed in several research settings
to college
motivation,
decrease
say, accept this ability attribution
abilities.
loneliness, and shyness
strivings
Most research has been done on the relation between attributional style (AS) and
outcomes.
According
to the attributional
experience
the outcome-related
affects
formulation,
of frustration
response
and sadness.
to failure
depends
If the failure
findings
is
response to the failure. Because the causes are unstable and controllable, the person
can maintain a strong expectation of success in the future, and therefore may feel
ability attribution
adds to those negative affects by lowering
low future expectancies
or hopelessness,
and generating
self-esteem,
producing
feelings of shame and
for loneliness
and shyness
have been essentially
the same,
with the exception
styles for interpersonal situations (for example, Anderson et al., 1988).
Most of the published studies on attributional style and depression have been
associated with the learned helplessness model espoused by Abramson, Seligman,
and Teasdale (1978), though conceptually the research is more closely related to
traditional attribution theory than to the original learned helplessness paradigm. The
Abramson et al., (1978) version stresses the importance of attributions along the
internality, stability, and globality dimensions.
Others, particularly Anderson
(Anderson and Arnoult, 1985b; Anderson and Riger, 1991), have stressed the
importance of internality, stability, and especially controllability.
(for example,
Anderson
and Arnoult,
1985a;
Anderson
et al.,
1988; Brewin,
1985;
Coyne
and
Gotlib,
1983;
Peterso
and
Seligm
1984;
Robin
1988;
Swee
et
ASs
con
to
the
pre
of
de
(A
an
A
1
al.,
1986).
The
reviews
vary
conside
in
the
range
of
studie
cover
A
r
thou
less
obv
ela
qu
co
ho
va
d
o
A
that
an
inte
com
ma
be
mo
m
F
e
a
x
failu
to
a
c
tha
is
unc
au
an
sta
an
in
m
b
p
dam
one
suc
exp
sel
pr
an
so
o
Y
w
k
Althoug
the
specific
of
the
theorie
and
the
scales
used
to
measu
them
diffe
of
only
maj
atte
to
tes
suc
int
of
A
(
R
A
AS
dim
is
imp
Sp
fo
fa
si
th
re
b
cont
AS
and
the
dep
co
u
i
s
n
quit
stro
whe
AS
wa
als
rel
sta
Pe
w
h
m
(uncontr
that
are
not
likely
to
change
on
their
own
(stabl
and
that
apply
mor
unc
attr
suf
mo
de
an
lo
th
t
who
mad
mor
con
att
Fo
su
si
a
h
The
question
posed
by
most
researc
has
been,
simply
is
there
a
r
betw
elati
inter
eme
The
con
to
w
q
AS
and
depressi
Althoug
some
rather
selecti
review
have
denie
there
stron
neg
in
all
cas
exc
wh
the
AS
w
b
re
u
a
o
inte
Und
tho
spe
re
be
co
A
consiste
relation
between
AS
and
depres
(and
lonelin
and
shyne
also)
depr
wa
not
sig
di
fr
ze
This
holds
true
almost
regardl
of
how
one
assess
AS
or
depre
(see
Swee
A
t
que
rec
hird
litt
att
da
co
th
sp
ro
rthe
A
question
concern
elated
genera
or
situati
specif
are
attrib
AS
dim
to
diff
eff
Th
ba
m
su
lo
d
styles,
and
their
to
various
kinds
of
proble
The
early
domi
view
was
that
AS
was
general
across
diverse
situatio
Most
resear
never
exam
cross-sit
consiste
of
AS
(for
examp
Cutro
et
al.,
1985
In
a'A
modera
level
of
specific
That
is,
scores
may
be:
conf
with
oth
cau
dim
su
as
co
T
c
only
across
situatio
that
are
simila
in
psych
meaning
ways,
but
not
across
very
diverg
types
of
situati
This
view
main
in
mos
exp
res
In
the
lat
ca
m
r
h
s
e
will
remain
fairly
constan
from
one
situatio
to
anothe
but
betwe
differ
situat
whe
othe
dim
mi
ha
ina
be
m
a
w
Perh
the
mo
imp
qu
lac
a
c
an
co
th
l
c
statu
of
attri
sty
We
kn
fro
ma
ex
~
n
of
importa
issues
are
umber
simply
not
addres
by
this
rough
mode
of
But
doe
AS
play
cau
rol
in
de
an
re
pr
in
li
I
s
in
wha
way
Bre
(19
and
oth
(A
A
1
h
p
deserve
being
called
controv
others
have
for
the
most
part
been
ignor
A
out
a
n
of
way
tha
AS
ma
be
um
rel
to
de
m
b
a
caus
or
v
Th
see
to
uln
the
cr
of
th
'd
v
AS
predict
concurr
depress
after
contro
has
partia
out?
Alte
AS
ma
be
a
m
ca
In
ca
m
a
A
m
thou
the
then
serv
to
ma
or
ev
in
th
de
(c
B
316/
Craig Anderson
Personality and attribution
and Bernard Weiner
Anderson
et al., analysed the results of over 100 studies of the Attributional Style Questionnaire
developed by the Seligman group (Peterson et al., 1982), whereas Anderson et al.
(1988) examined the results of the four studies that had used the Attributional Style
Assessment
to many
situations
is evidence,
combine
1990).
to predict
'
depression
(cf. Carver,
1989).
Various
writings
suggest
1990).
That research
strongly
supports
the idea that the interactive
combination
of
(global).
the more
complete
reviews
unequivocally
demonstrate
that there
is a
1986).
this assumption,
discussing
but recent research
this issue, Anderson
that did look into the problem
et al. (1988) proposed
called into question
that attributional
style has
should be primarily related to self-esteem,
the stability dimension
should be related
to succesS expectancies,
and controllability
should be related to several specific social
emotions.
One problem in testing these various more specific predictions
is that in
naturalistically
generated populations
of causes, the attribution
dimensions
correlate
with each other quite highly (lor example,
Anderson,
1985). Thus, data showing
that
the
problem
that within situation types (e.g. interpersonal
types (e.g., interpersonal
correspondence.
(p. 980)
The
Rigel',
Test.
somewhat, the basic attributional model in Figure 11.3 is common to all. Depression
(and within more specific domains, loneliness and shyness) is the end result of a
series of failures or negative outcomes attributed maladaptively. Depressed people
see the failures as being their fault (internal), due to causes that they cannot change
et al.,
might
and
/317
data
depression
support
and
this
similar
failure
failure) the relative standing of individuals
vs. noninterpersonal
success)
there
of attributions
occurs
both in research
manipulated
attributions
are causal agents in success
in living.
Some
have
receiv<;d
enough
along
is correlated
of individual
one dimension
with
self-esteem
differences
without
are
almost
in attributional
carefully
always
style,
checking
and
to see
will be little
view.
problems
locus
attention
most obvious question concerns whether or not each causal dimension
contributes to the prediction of depression. For instance, does a person's
expectancies,
affect,
motivation,
and performance
quality.
to
uniquely
globality
Similarly, do both success and failure attributional styles contribute uniquely to the
prediction of depression? These questions have received scant attention, but the
research that does exist suggests that controllability is the most important dimension,
but that stability and locus both contribute uniquely as well; both success and failure
emphasized
by Metalsky,
Abramson,
Seligman,
Semmel,
and
Peterson
(1982)
I hat
is, a maladaptive attributional style produces depression when a sufficiently high
level of stress (negative outcomes) is experienced and maladaptively interpreted.
not even develop until a series of events produces
depression.
Once developed,
possibili
that
AS
is
merely
a
c
of
depres
playin
orrela
no
causa
role
whatsoe
Testing
these
models
is
extrem
difficu
and
conse
rare.
At
this
point
in
time,
the
fairest
conclu
is
that
there
is
some
suppo
for
view
We
sho
also
poi
out
tha
mo
po
co
i
n
AS
as
a
p
and
as
m
redispo
cause,
but
that
consi
bette
ainta
to
iden
and
cha
are
bas
ma
se
A
m
o
t
there
has
been
a
g
field
of
attribu
therap
rowing
(see
Forste
1985
1986
case,
causal
ascripti
guide
behavi
It
then
follow
that
a
c
in
think
hang
the
anticipa
that
this
alterati
will
produc
chang
in
behav
expe
and
the
dyn
of
be
an
be
ch
O
c
a
for
a
b
ran
of
rele
fro
roa
ex
th
s
y
We
beli
that
futu
att
th
is
ve
br
in
u
m
pop
para
wh
dom
for
a
b
pe
on
to
d
r
a
q
to
substitu
is
lack
of
effort.
Lack
of
effort
is
consid
an
intern
cause
just
as
is
low
ability.
Howev
effort
is
concei
of
as
unstab
and
contr
Less
as
they
aros
We
are
opt
sev
re
T
b
th
i
In
add
attr
the
con
to
in
n
co
A
e
Fors
198
it
is
bei
app
ar
ra
fr
sp
p
t
do
differ,
howeve
in
other
respect
Luck
is
percei
as
more
unsta
than
is
perc
resp
(se
rev
in
W
19
it
is
es
in
m
(positive
motivat
while
still
lowerin
self-es
(a
perfor
inhib
luck
of
this
cha
nee
con
ref
an
te
A
b
u
attributi
theoreti
mainta
expect
of
succes
as
well
as
self-e
and
wha
kind
of
info
are
use
in
att
an
h
t
i
h
beco
sali
and
rele
to
the
wi
ce
in
th
d
attri
inte
eit
as
'st
th
o
m
l
a
ranging
from
mild
phobias
to
genera
depres
(for
examp
Brew
and
Anta
1982;
Layden,
1982).
Rehm
(1982)
has
explic
incorp
attrib
and
con
of
the
env
wi
rem
at
co
act
318/
Clilig Anderson
1985, recovery
methodologies
and Bernard
model).
are needed
Several
Personality
Weiner
other models are also possible,
to test the models
including
the
In conjunction
Attributional
therapy
therapies
are guided
approach to personality dynamics,
by the fundamental
principle
/319
approaches
(for example,
the work of Bandura,
1977; Beck, 1967; -Ellis, 1977;
Meichenbaum,
1977) include many featUres that would warm the heart of any good
adequately.
with the growth of an attributional
attribution
components in his self-management
approach to the treatment of depression.
Unfortunately, there has been relatively little therapy outcome research sPticifically
designed to test the unique effects of attributional components.
attribution
Attributional
and
that thoughts
(in this
theorist.
For example,
many of the negative
thoughts
that clients are taught
skills acquistion tasks are structured in such a way as to maximize the client's selfattributions for success. Thus, the effectiveness of supposedly non-attributional
therapies may often be due, to a great extent, to the attributional changes wrought
by the therapies.
should produce a change in action. The goal of attributional therapies has therefore
been to substitute adaptive causal ascriptions for those that are dysfunctional, with
Summary
Attributional therapies have been, for the most part, confined to achievement-related
contexts, though numerous authors have suggested attribution-related
therapies for
a variety of clinical problems. Within the achievement domain, researchers (change
agents) have assumed that dysfunctional attributions have greater impact in situations
of failure than of success, and that the most maladaptive causal ascription for
achievement failure is lack of ability. This logically follows inasmuch as lack of
ability is conceived as an internal, stable, and uncontrollable cause. In the majority
of experimental reports, the adaptive cause that the therapist or researcher has sought
and conclusions
The centrality of attribution theory to both social and personality psychologists has
been documented throughout this chapter, which has examined: attributions as defence
mechanisms; attributions as determinants of trait inferences; individual differences
in causal ascriptions; and attributional determinants of expectancy of success, affective
frequently, the designated causal attribution for achievement failure in the published
literature has been bad luck or an overly difficult task. Because these are external
causes for failure, self-esteem is maintained. Luck and task difficulty ascriptions
of conscious experience and the ascendance of cognitive psychology have not waned.
task difficulty, so that expectancies for success should be higher given luck rather
than a difficulty ascription. It should be noted, therefore, that lack of effort as against
bad luck as against an overly difficult task are all specified to improve motivation
and coping relative to a low ability ascription for failure. However, the variables
mediating the hypothesized improvement are not identical for the three causal
ascriptions. Effort attributions theoretically maintain expectancy and induce guilt
consumer
task
difficulty
attributions
only
maintain
positive
self-esteem,
while
theory
is now
becoming
behaviour
issues related
(see
an established
Graham
to reactions
part
and
of psychotherapy
Folkes,
1990);
to the stigmatized,
it has
(see
Brewin,
successfully
excuse-giving,
1988;
addressed
consequences
of
and educational psychology; and on and on.
Despite the success of attribution theory in such an array of domains, much basic
research remains to be done. The attribution process, as laid out in the first part
lowering
expectancy estimates. (See Weiner, 1988, for fuller discussion of attributional
therapy. )
In more clinical contexts, attribution theory advances have been applied to problems
of attributional
components
interventions.
of
large
Much
remains
behaviour-change
psychology, with the ever-increasing
to be done in development
and testing
programmes.
personality
interest in self-perception,
Certainly
affective experience,
Brew
C.R
(19
'De
and
cau
au
w
i
th
re
P
s
Cog
Fo
of
Cl
Ps
H
N
E
Abrams
L
Y
Seligma
M.E.P.
and
Teasda
J.
(1978)
'Learn
.,
helple
in
huma
C.,
and
Ant
C.
(19
'Th
rol
of
att
in
ps
tr
in
C
A
Bre
(ed
Att
an
nt
C
Y
Anderso
C.A.
(l983a)
'Motiva
perform
deficit
in
interp
settin
the
NY:
Aca
Pre
pp.
23CA.
(l983b)
The
causal
structu
of
situati
the
gener
of
plaus
causa
Cac
J.T.
Pet
R.E
ne
fo
co
Jo
o
P
(1985),
'Actor
and
observ
attribu
for
differ
types
situat
Carv
Cha
S.
(19
'Ho
sho
mu
pe
co
b
t
i
e
Anderso
C.A.
(1989),
'How
people
think
about
causes
exami
of
the
typica
phen
Cha
M.,
and
Dyc
D.G
(19
'Pe
in
ch
re
a
f
organiza
of
attribut
paper
presen
at
the
Nags
Head
Confe
on
Socia
of
N
l
attr
eng
ret
Jo
of
Ab
P
8
5
.
Cognitio
Kill
Devil
Hills,
NC,
11-16
June
1989.
W.F
Joh
O.P
and
Go
LR
(1
'C
o
s
r
CA.,
and
Arnoul
LH.
(l985a)
'Attrib
model
depre
lonel
and
shyness
in
J.
Harvey
and
G.
Weary
(eds.),
Attribu
Basic
issues
and
appli
New
York,
NY:
Academ
Press,
pp.
235-79
Cov
M.
V.,
Om
CL
(19
'A
em
ex
W
c
Anderso
C.A.
(l985b
style
and
every
probl
in
Coy
J.C.
and
Got
LH
(19
Th
rol
of
co
in
de
a
c
a
Jenning
D.L
(1980)
'When
experi
of
failure
prom
expec
Cutr
CE.
Rus
D.,
and
Jon
R.
(1
'C
i
CA.
and
Riger,
A.L
(1991)
'A
contro
attribu
mode
of
Dwe
C.S
Goe
T.E
'At
an
le
he
in
J
H
W.J
Icke
and
R.F
Kid
(ed
Ne
Di
in
At
R
N
Y
Anderso
CA.,
Slusher
M.P.
(1986)
'Reloc
motiv
effect
a
s
of
ynth
NY:
Erlb
vol
2,
pp.
157
Eise
V.
(197
'Ac
dif
in
i
an
c
n
a
C.A.,
Jenning
D.L,
and
Arnou
LH.
(1988
'Valid
and
utility
the
Ellis
A.
'Th
bas
clin
the
of
rat
th
A
E
R
Grie
(eds
Ha
of
Ra
Th
N
Y
N
S
p
Feat
N.T
and
Tig
M.
(19
'A
ba
m
o
a
s
Arkin,
R.M.,
and
Baumg
A.H.
(1985)
'Self-h
in
J.H.
Harve
and
G.
Flet
G.J
Dan
P.,
Fe
G.
Pe
D
a
R
G
(
n
Weary
(eds.),
Attribut
Basic
issues
and
applic
New
York,
NY:
Acad
Press
Bandura
A.
(1977),
Social
Learnin
Theory
Englew
Cliffs
NJ:
Prent
Hall.
Baucom
D.,
Sayers,
S.L,
and
Duhe,
A.
(1989)
'Attrib
style
and
attrib
patte
Fors
F.
(19
Att
Th
in
Cl
Ps
N
Y
N
W
Beck,
A.T.
(1967),
The
Diagno
alld
Manag
of
Depre
Philad
PA:
Frie
tH.,
and
We
B.
(19
'Cu
uti
an
at
ju
f
s
and
failu
Jou
of
Per
39
59
Beckma
L
(
'Effects
of
student
1970),
perform
on
teache
obser
attrib
Gilb
D.T
Pel
B.W
and
Kr
D.
(1
'O
co
b
w
p
toward
a
r
clinical
perspec
efined
in
R.
Curtis
(ed.),
Self-d
Beha
Gilo
T.
(19
'Bia
eva
an
pe
in
ga
Jo
(
Experim
researc
clinical
impres
and
practi
implic
New
York
NY:
Bradley,
G.W.
(1978),
'Self-se
biases
the
attribu
proces
arof
the
eexa
men
hea
and
inte
CO
Hi
N
E
Han
R.D
'Co
eco
co
at
piJ
Craig Anderson
320/
and Bernard Weiner
Personality
and attrilJuliull
/321
References
Bulletin,
critique
and reformulation,'
effects of attributional
attributions
Psychology,
Journal
of Abnormal
Psychology,
causal structure effects, individual differences,
.
Cognition, 3, 323-340.
Journal
297-309.
87, 49-74.
style', Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
as a function of type of event situation',
19, 185-203.
98,
45, 1]36-47.
of Experimental
and the dimensionality
of causes,'
Brown,
J.D.
(1988),
'Self-directed
outcomes',
Personality
and
and Social
Psychology,
42,
Social
and shyness',
Social Cognition,
Psychological
in the prediction
of depression
attributional style construct at a moderate level of specificity,' Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, 55, 979-90.
Andrews, G.R., and Debus, R.L. (1978), 'Persistence and causal perception of failure:
modifying cognitive attributions',
Journal of Educational Psychology, 70, 154-166.
169-202.
Averill,
among
J.R.
(1983),
married
University
'Studies
couples',
of Pennsylvania
on anger
and aggression',
Journal
of Personality
American
and
Social
Psychologist,
Psychology,
Press,
pp.
38,1145-60.
56,
attributes with ideals as prototypes',
54, 541-57.
research',
Journal
of Educational
Journal
Journal of Personality
of Personality
Psychology,
and Social
76, 1214-25.
Bulletin,
94,
472-505.
attributions: does attributional style exist?', Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
47, 1043-58.
Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology,
37, 261-72.
3-34.
Australian
Joumal
of
Psychology,
36,
267-83.
'Attributional complexity: an individual difference measure' , Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, 51, 857-84.
Forsterling, F. (1985), 'Attributional training: a review', Psychological Bulletin, 98, 495-512.
Forsterling,
F. (1986), 'Attributional
conceptions
in clinical psychology',
American
Psychologist, 41, 275-85.
596-607.
personality
disorder:
perceivers
733-40.
meet persons perceived',
Journal
and Social Psychology,
44, 1110-26.
Graham,
S. and Folkes, V.S. (eds) (1990),
261-88.
fact or fiction question',
style, and hardiness',
Press.
of causality', Jour/wi of Educational Psychology, 61, 76-82.
Berglas, S. (1989), 'Self-handicapping
behavior and the self-defeating
Plenum
for balanced
and
cognitive and motivational effects on attributions for success and failure', Social Cognition,
4, 270-92.
pp.
attributions
14,252-63.
3, 16-35.
of success: the impact of attributing failure to ineffective strategies', Journal of Personality,
48, 393-407.
in living: dimensional and situational interactions
loneliness', Social Cognition, 9, 149-81.
and causal
Bulletin,
116-31.
illustrated by self-monitoring,
attributional
and Social Psychology, 56, 577~85.
of attributional
loneliness,
self-esteem,
Psychology
Social
dimensional
Psychology,
living: depression,
attention,
Social
Journal
of Personality
and Social Psychology,
36, 56-71.
of Personality
Attribution
Theory:
and Social Psychology,
Applications
to achievement,
54,
Harvey
and
G.
Weary
(eds.),
AttribU
Basic
issues
and
applic
New
York
NY:
Mil
D.T
and
Ro
M.
(19
'Se
bi
in
th
at
o
c
f
Heider,
F.
(1958),
The
Psycho
of
Interpe
Relati
New
York:
Wiley
Mon
T.C
Sny
'A
o
an
a
p
b
t
Mul
B.,
Rio
C.A
at
fo
p
i
n
Hilton,
D.J.,
and
Slugosk
B.R.
(1986)
'Know
based
causal
attribu
the
abno
Atk
1.L
Ch
D.
Ed
c.
H
D
S
J
a
Van
M.
(19
'Th
fal
co
ef
a
m
o
1
h
Nisb
R.E
and
Ro
L
(
Hu
In
19
St
a
s
E
h
Horney,
K.
(1937),
Neuroti
Person
of
Our
Times
New
York:
Norto
Clif
NJ:
Pre
Ha
Isenberg
A.
(1980),
'Natura
pride
and
natural
shame
in
A.G.
Rorty
(ed.),
Expla
Emotion
Berkele
CA:
Univer
Califo
Press,
pp.
355-H
Johnson
T.1.,
Feigenb
R.,
Weiby
M.
(1964)
'Some
determ
and
conse
Pete
C.,
Sel
M.
an
Va
G
(
'P
e
1
s
i
Jones,
E.E.,
and
Davis,
K.W.
(1')65)
'From
acts
to
dispos
the
attrib
proce
in
New
York,
NY:
Academ
Press,
vol.
2,
pp.
219-66
M.E
(19
'Th
Att
Sty
Qu
C
T
a
R
Harris,
V.A.
(1967),
'The
attribu
of
attitud
Journ
of
Expe
Prui
D.1
and
Ins
C.A
(19
'Ex
of
th
K
at
m
t
r
McGill
D.
(1976)
'Corres
infere
and
cube
aJones,
cKelley,
reappra
in
J.
ompara
Harvey
W.1.
Ickes,
and
R.F.
Kidd
(eds.)
New
Direc
Reh
LP.
'Se
in
de
in
P.
a
F
K
(
E.E.,
and
Nisbett
R.E.
(1971)
actor
the
observ
diverg
perce
The
Psy
of
Sel
ma
Fr
th
to
pr
N
Y
N
P
of
the
causes
of
behavio
E.E.
Jones,
D.E.
Kanou
H.H.
Kelle
R.
E.
Nisbe
S.
Valins,
B.
Weiner
(eds.),
AttribU
Percei
cause
of
behav
Morr
Reis
R.
(19
'Th
Sc
the
of
em
tw
d
la
NJ:
General
Learnin
Press,
pp.
79-94.
H.H.
(1967),'
Attribu
theory
in
social
psycho
in
D.
Levin
(ed.),
Nebr
'A
stru
eq
an
of
W
am
Symposi
on
Motivat
Lincoln
NE:
Unive
of
Nebra
Press
vol.
15,
pp.
(1971),
'Causal
schema
and
the
attribu
proce
in
E.E.
Jones
D.E.
and
Typ
A
b
Jou
of
Re
in
eh
Pe
2
6
Rob
C.1
(19
'At
an
de
w
i
th
li
s
i
Kanouse
Kelley,
R.E.
Nisbet
S.
Valins
and
B.
Weine
(eds.)
Attrib
Kelley,
H.H.
(1973),
'The
process
of
causal
Ameri
Psych
28,
107-2
Ros
L
a
And
C.A
(\9
'Sh
nd
at
p
o
t
mai
of
err
soc
as
D
K
P
S
a
A
Tve
(ed
Jud
un
Ul
H
a
b
N
Y
N
Kingdon
1.W.
(1967),
'Politic
beliefs
about
voters
Politi
Scien
Revie
L,
Bie
G.,
and
Po
S.
(1
'A
o
e
b
Kruglan
A.W.
(1980),
'Lay
epistem
p
and
conte
anoth
look
roces
at
Kuiper,
N.A.
(1978),
'Depres
and
causal
attribu
for
succe
and
failur
Joul'
Ros
Gre
D.,
Ho
P.
(19
'T
'
co
;f
a
e
Layden,
M.A.
(1982),
'Attribu
style
therap
in
C.
Antak
C.
Brew
(eds.
AttribUt
and
Psycho
Chang
New
York,
NY:
Acade
Press
pp.
63-82
Marks,
G.,
and
Miller,
N.
(1987),
'Ten
years
of
resear
on
the
falseeffec
an
Rot
J.B.
and
Ho
D.
Pe
G
It
S
F
Meichen
D.
(1977),
Cogniti
Modifi
New
York,
NY:
Plenu
Press
Seli
M.E
Ab
LY
Se
A
avo
B
C
('D
n1
322/
Craig Anderson
Academic
Press,
pp.
and Bernard Weiner
Personality
or fiction?',
65-85.
Hewstone, M., and Jaspars, 1. (1987), 'Covariation and causal attribution: a logical model
of the intuitive analysis of variance', Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53,
663- 72.
conditions
focus
model',
Psychological
Review,
93,
of the teacher's perception of causation', Journal of Educational Psychology, 55, 237-46.
Jones, E.E., and Berglas, S. (1978), 'Control of attributions about the self through selfhandicapping strategies: the appeal of alcohol and the role of underachievement' , Personality
and Social Psychology Bulluin, 4, 200-6.
perception',
in L. Berkowitz
Social
Psychology,
3,
(eds.),
Advances
a reconceptualization',
settings:
Bulletin,
Journal
a meta-analytic
82,
213-25.
of Experimental
review',
in Experimental
Social
Psychology,
tests',
Journal
Social
of Applied
Psychology,
Social
13, 89-111.
Psychology,
18, 3-22.
Joul'I/al
of Experimental
Social
Psychology,
21,
262-83.
Nisbett, R.E., Caputo, c., Legant, P., and Marecek, 1. (1973), 'Behavior as seen by the
actor and as seen by the observer', Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 27,
154-65.
Peterson, C., and Seligman, M.E.P. (1984), 'Causal explanations as a risk factor for
depression: theory and evidence', Psychological Review, 91, 347-74.
a risk factor for physical illness: a thirty-five year longitudinal study', Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology, 55, 23-7.
Peterson,
6,
C., Semmel,
A., von Baeyer,
c.,
Abramson,
LY.,
Metalsky,
GJ.,
and Seligman,
287-99.
1-24.
of comparison object consensus, target object consensus, distinctiveness
Journal of Personality and Social psychology, 39, 39-58.
in Attribution
/323
75-HH.
Hoffman, M.L. (1975), 'Developmental synthesis of affect and cognition and its implications
for altruistric motivation',
Developmental Psychology, 11, 607 - 22.
person
Psychological
and attriLJUtion
Research,
Hillsdale,
NJ:
Erlbaum,
vol.
I, pp.
and consistency',
389-420.
pp.522-70
Bulletin,
Perceiving
the causes
H.H.,
and
of Psychology,
of behavior,
Michela,
J.L
Morristown,
(1980),
NJ: General
'Attribution
theory
Learning
and
Press,
research',
pp. 151-74.
Annual
Journal
theory',
Psychology
of Personality
and Social
empirical
theOretical
.
and Social Psychology,
54, 880-9.
Review
University
Press,
pp.
129-52.
137-45.
attribution
Metalsky,
of Personality
31, 457-501.
Cambridge
14,
239-64.
of helping behavior', Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50, 1123-33.
Rhodewalt, F., Strube, M.J., Hill, C.A., and Sansone, C. (\988), 'Strategic self-attribution
192-238.
Kelley,
94,
and
G.\.,
Abramson,
Review,
Psychology,
review',
LY.,
87,
36, 236-46.
Psychological
Seligman,
professional and nonprofessional
29,609-18.
70-87.
M.E.P.,
instructors',
Jour/wi ofPersollality
and Sociul Psychology,
bias in social perception and attribution processes',
Journal of f.\perill/ental
Social
Psychology, 13,279-301.
Rotter, J.B. (1966), 'Generalized
expectancies
for internal versus external control of
reinforcement',
Psychological Monographs, 80, whole no. 609.
Bulletin,
102,
Semmel,
A.,
72-90.
and
PetersoIl,
C.
(1982),
Allributional styles and life events in the classroom: vulnerability and invulnerability to
depressive mood reactions', Joul'I/lll of Personality and Social Psychology, 43, 612-17.
Schachter,
S., and Singer,
J.E. (1962),
'Cognition,
of emotional
state',
Psychological
Review,
69,
allributional
style',
Journal
(~f Abnormal
social
379-99.
PSycllOlog\',
and physiological
88,
242.~
7.
determillants
Snyder,
M.L.,
Stephan
W.G.,
and
Rosenf
D.
(1976)
'Egoti
and
attrib
Journ
Storms,
M.D.
(1973),
'Videot
the
attribu
proces
revers
actors
and
obser
phenom
in
L.
Berkow
(ed.),
Admnc
in
Exper
Socia
Psych
New
York,
NY:
Academ
Press,
vol.
II,
pp.
249-88
Tetlock,
P.E.,
and
Levi,
A.
(1982),
'Attribu
bias:
on
the
inconc
of
the
cogn
Trivers,
R.
L.
(1971),
'The
evoluti
of
recipro
altruis
Quart
Revie
Biolo
Trope,
Y.
(1986),
'Identifi
and
inferen
proces
in
dispos
attrib
Weiner,
B.
(1985),
'Attribu
theory
of
achiev
motiv
and
emot
(1986),
An
Attribu
Theory
Motiva
and
Emoti
New
York
NY:
(1988),
theory
and
attribu
therap
some
theore
obser
Weiner,
B.,
Russell,
D.,
and
Lerman
D.
(1978)
'Affec
conse
of
causa
ascriptio
in
J.H.
Harvey
W.J.
Ickes
R.F.
Kidd
(eds.),
New
Direc
in
Attrib
Researc
Hillsdal
NJ:
Erlbaum
vol.
2,
pp.
59-88.
(1979)
'The
cognit
proce
in
Wicker,
W.F.,
Payne,
G.C.,
Morga
R.D.
(1983)
'Partic
descr
guilt
Wilson,
T.D.,
and
Linville
P.W.
(1982)
'Impro
the
academ
perfor
of
colle
Wong,
P.T.P.,
and
Weiner
B.
(1981),
'When
people
ask
"why"
questi
and
the
heuri
Zillmann
D.
(1978),
'Attribu
and
misattr
of
excita
reacti
in
J.
Harv
W.1.
Ickes,
R.
Kidd
(eds.),
New
Direcl
in
Attribu
Resea
Hillsd
NJ:
Zuckerm
M,
(1979),
of
succes
and
failure
revisit
or:
the
motiv
bias
is
alive
and
well
in
attribut
theory'
Journa
Perso
47,
245-2
324/
Craig Anderson
Snyder, CR.,
of reality',
and Bernard Weiner
and Higgins,
Psychological
of Personality
R.L. (1988), 'Excuses:
Bulletin, 104, 23-35.
and Social
Psychology,
33,
their effective
role in the negotiation
435-41.
point of view'. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 27, 165-75.
Sweeney, P., Anderson, K., and Bailey, S. (1986), 'Attributional style in depression: a metaanalytic review', Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50, 974-91.
Taylor, S.E., and Fiske, S.T. (1978), 'Salience, attention, and attribution: top of the head
Tennen, H., and Herzberger, S. (1987), 'Depression, self-esteem, and the absence of selfprotective attributional biases', Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 72-80.
motivation
46,
debate',
Journal
of E.tperimewal
Social
Psychology,
18, 68-88.
35-57.
Psychological
Review,
93,
239-57.
Uleman, 1.S. (1987), 'Consciousness and control: the case of spontaneous
Personality and Social Psychology Bullellll, 13, 337-54.
Psychological
Review,
92,
trait inferences',
548-73.
Springer-Verlag,
and suggestions',
British
contexts',
of Clinical
Journal
Psychology,
of Personality
27,
and Social
93-104.
Psychology,
37,
1211-20.
\
!
achievement-related
Journal
1
25-39.
,
7,
j
Emotion,
1
freshmen: attribution therapy revisited', Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
42, 367-76.
Wright, E.F., and Wells, G.L. (1988), 'Is the attitude-attribution
paradigm suitable for
investigating the dispositional bias'?', Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 14,
183-90.
1
and
j
Motivation
,
shame',
I
and
search',
Journal
of Personality
and Social Psychology,
40, 650-63.
j
J
of attributional
Erlbaum,
vol.
2,
pp.
335-68.