Attribution Theory
Attribution theory explores how individuals interpret and explain the behavior of themselves and others. It focuses on the reasons people attribute to events and the impact of these attributions on their emotions and behaviors. This theory helps to understand how people make sense of the world around them and how they perceive causality in social situations.
8 Key excerpts on "Attribution Theory"
eBook - ePubMyth of Addiction
Second Edition
- John Booth Davies(Author)
- 2013(Publication Date)
- Routledge(Publisher)
...1 Attribution Theory: Explaining Explanation Attribution Theory is a general title for a body of theory and research into the ways in which people explain why things happen. By and large the bulk of the work has confined itself to the explanations that people offer for various types of human behaviour, rather than the behaviour of objects, animals or natural forces, and this preoccupation probably reflects Western conceptions and values about the nature of the world. For religious and other reasons, we tend to view ourselves as the focus or centre of the Universe, or as the high point of creation, and hence Attribution Theory has concentrated on the explanation of human behaviour to the relative neglect of other things. It is clear that from other cultural perspectives, which see humans as part of a larger purposive universal process with a will and/or direction of its own, Attribution Theory would take a different and rather interesting turn; for example, certain central precepts would simply not make sense from such a perspective (Jahoda 1979). Nonetheless, within our own cultural framework, Attribution Theory has offered important insights into the ways in which people explain their own actions and the actions of others; and in the course of that process light has coincidentally been shed on the difference between causal explanations as social constructions (reasons) and causal explanations as scientific statements (causes). For example, the ‘reason’ for a particular action is frequently a verbal statement made by an individual when asked a question by a third party, such as ‘Why did you do this?’, or ‘Why did she do that?’. In answering the question the motives, affiliations, intentions and self-perceptions of the person doing the explaining are often reflected in the type of explanation offered...
eBook - ePub- Richard Gross, Rob McIlveen(Authors)
- 2016(Publication Date)
- Routledge(Publisher)
...The chapter then examines four models of attribution, and then moves on to consider errors and biases that people often make. Some consideration is given to how the child develops in terms of attributing causes to behaviour, then moves on to consider the wider social and societal context in which attributions are made. The chapter concludes by looking at personality and attributional style, and the application of the attribution approach to the understanding and treatment of clinical depression. Figure 5.1 : Key features of the attribution approach in social psychology 5.2 Basic considerations Before looking at theory and research in the attributional approach, it is important to have a good understanding of the underlying concepts, when we are most likely to make attributions, and when attributions of cause are made automatically or only after some deliberation (Gilbert, 1989). 5.2.1 Fundamental concepts The conceptual foundation on which theories of attribution have been built was provided by Heider (1944) who offered three principles: 1 behaviour is perceived as being caused; 2 perceptions are important; 3 the locus of the cause(s) of behaviour is perceived to be with the person, the situation, or some combination of both. We will deal with each of these points in turn. Claiming that people perceive behaviour as being caused may seem rather obvious and trite on first acquaintance, however, the important point is that we attribute causes to virtually all human behaviour. People appear to be ill at ease or loath to admit or believe that behaviour happens because of chance events. Everything that others and ourselves do is believed to result from one or a number of specific causes. How behaviour is perceived to be caused, rather than how it is actually caused (if this can ever be known), is of interest to attribution theorists. Consider again the example, given earlier, where you were asked to imagine you performed poorly at a job interview...
eBook - ePub- Donald C. Pennington(Author)
- 2012(Publication Date)
- Routledge(Publisher)
...2 Attribution of causality I: concepts and theories What are attributions? The basics Theories of attribution Individual differences Cultural differences Evaluation of concepts and models Summary What are attributions? Imagine that you have just read about a case in the newspaper where a woman had been convicted of the manslaughter of her husband and yet had been given just a suspended sentence. The woman had suffered years of abuse from her husband and was not able to put up with it any longer; this resulted in her stabbing him to death. Why did she kill her husband? Your best friend, you have recently discovered, has lied to you about her whereabouts last Saturday night. For months both of you had planned to go to a concert and had reserved tickets at the theatre. On the Friday night your best friend rang to say that she could not go out with you because she had to stay in to babysit for her parents. In fact she went out to the nightclub with other friends. Why did your friend behave like this towards you? You have just taken a mock psychology examination and been told by your teacher that you have not done very well. This surprises you since you had been revising for weeks for the examination. How do you explain your poor performance? Each of these three examples requires an explanation of someone’s behaviour. In doing this you may infer or make a judgement about the cause of the behaviour. Causal attributions help us to understand our own and other people’s behaviour. People have a very strong tendency to provide a causal explanation for virtually any act or behaviour —quite often this is achieved with little conscious thought. Heider (1958) initiated the development of the attribution approach in social psychology. He proposed that the main reason people make causal explanations is to help them predict and control their social worlds...
eBook - ePubConsistency in Cognitive Social Behaviour
An introduction to social psychology
- C.J. Mower White(Author)
- 2015(Publication Date)
- Psychology Press(Publisher)
...One of the ways in which this aspect of social psychology has attempted to be concerned with applied fields is in the attribution of success and failure. It is apparent that how one attributes the cause of successful behaviour – whether to oneself or to the situation in which it occurred – may markedly affect similar future behaviour. In the same way the attribution of another person’s successes or failures to himself, or to luck, or to environmental causes may affect his future behaviour. This has been introduced into both clinical and educational fields with some advantage, as will be discussed later in the chapter. A final aspect of attribution which will be considered is relevant to all earlier discussions. It appears that an attribution, once made, is seldom abandoned or changed. This so-called ‘primacy effect’ and its implications will be outlined at the end of the chapter. In conclusion, there will be a consideration of the functions of attribution, in terms of evaluation and consistency, and an analogy will be drawn between a layman’s attributions and those of the professional psychologist. 2 Basic statements in Attribution Theory The major concern in Attribution Theory has been the conditions under which behaviour is attributed to the person as opposed to the situation in which he behaves. The early work introducing this topic was by Heider (1944, 1958) who claimed that people attempt to see the social environment as predictable and therefore controllable. In order to predict the behaviour of another, we look for the conditions which will explain it, such as his ability or his assumed personality, which Heider termed ‘personal causes’ (1958, p.16). Alternatively his behaviour may be attributed to ‘impersonal causes’ such as a different person, or some non-personal event. If behaviour is seen as being controlled by these external or impersonal causes, then attributions in terms of personality traits are less likely to be made...
eBook - ePubAttribution Theory
An Organizational Perspective
- Mark Martinko(Author)
- 2018(Publication Date)
- Routledge(Publisher)
...There are several sources that provide excellent introductions and discussions of Attribution Theory. These include Graham and Folkes (1990), Kelley and Michela (1980), Martinko (in press a and b), Green and Mitchell (1979), Weiner (1986), Weiner et al. (1971), and Zelen (1991). The discussion presented here is not intended to be comprehensive, but rather it is intended to provide a basic introduction to this area, as well as identify some of the major issues, challenges, and opportunities associated with Attribution Theory. NATURE OF ATTRIBUTIONS Attribution Theory concerns people’s causal explanations for events (Martinko, in press a). Stimulated by the early writings of Heider (1958), social psychologists have become increasingly concerned with the processes by which people explain their own successes and failures (Weiner, 1987) and those of others (Jones, 1976; Kelley and Michela, 1980). Heider’s basic premise was that people have an innate need to understand and control their environments. Thus, individuals function as “naive psychologists,” developing causal explanations for significant events. These beliefs about causation influence expectations, which, in turn, influence subsequent behavior. Thus, attribution theorists are concerned with the perceived causes of events and the consequences of those perceptions. For example, an employee who attributes the failure to make a sale to lack of ability will have a lowered expectation of future success and is unlikely to expend effort on sales in the future. On the other hand, if an employee attributes the failure to make a sale to an inappropriate presentation, that person may change his or her presentation with the expectation that a better presentation will result in success in the future. The premise that our beliefs about ourselves and others influence our behavior is not new...
eBook - ePubManagement and Organization Theory
A Jossey-Bass Reader
- Jeffrey A. Miles(Author)
- 2012(Publication Date)
- Jossey-Bass(Publisher)
...Know Kelley, H. H. (1967). Attribution Theory in social psychology. In D. Levine (Ed.), Nebraska symposium on motivation (Vol. 15, pp. 192–238). Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press. Kelley, H. H., & Michela, J. L. (1980). Attribution Theory and research. Annual Review of Psychology, 31, 457–501. Rotter, J. B. (1966). Generalized expectancies for internal versus external control of reinforcement. Psychological Monographs, 80, 1–28. Weiner, B. (1985). An attributional theory of achievement motivation and emotion. Psychological Review, 92, 548–573. Weiner, B. (1986). An attributional theory of motivation and emotion. New York: Springer. Implications of the Theory for Managers Attribution Theory examines how people tend to automatically determine the cause of their own and others’ behaviors. The theory looks at how people tend to determine that the causes of behaviors are either internal to the person (for example, effort or ability) or external to the person (for example, luck or task difficulty). Managers tend to automatically determine the cause of their own and their employees’ behaviors and then base their treatment of their employees on those causal attributions. As a manager, you need to remember that employees tend to make attribution errors. For example, if employees perform successfully, they tend to give themselves credit for their success. However, if employees perform poorly, they tend to blame factors outside themselves (such as their boss) for their failure. You need to be aware of this attribution error and help employees determine the correct causes for their performance levels. You also need to be aware that managers too tend to make attribution errors. If an employee performs successfully, managers tend to attribute that success to themselves (and not to the employee). However, if an employee performs poorly, then managers tend to blame the employee (and not take responsibility for their employee’s poor performance)...
eBook - ePubAttribution Theory
Applications to Achievement, Mental Health, and Interpersonal Conflict
- Sandra Graham, Valerie S. Folkes, Sandra Graham, Valerie S. Folkes(Authors)
- 2014(Publication Date)
- Psychology Press(Publisher)
...This freeing of attributions from just the locus dimension can be seen in the chapters by Graham, McAuley and Duncan, and Peterson. Attribution Theory and Clinical Psychology Clinical psychology also has benefited from the growth of Attribution Theory. Like social psychology, clinical psychology was ready to undergo change in the 1970s. Academic psychologists had long been suspicious (at best) of the nonempirical stance of psychoanalytic theorists. While alternative approaches in clinical psychology were available in the 1960s, none dominated the imagination of psychologists. At about this time, cognitive therapies began to gain increasing attention. Sparked by the ideas of Beck, Ellis, and G. Kelly, how clients make sense out of their world and how these interpretations direct their feelings and actions became a central theme in change attempts. Even behaviorally oriented therapists began to recognize the importance of thought processes, and there grew an influential school of cognitive behavioral modification. These trends provided the background for the growth of attributional therapy and the application of attributional language to explain clinical phenomena, especially depression. The initial change programs guided by Attribution Theory involved children exhibiting maladaptive behavior in achievement contexts, such as quitting in the face of failure and displaying little frustration tolerance. The goal of the change program was to have these children think differently about the cause(s) of their failures. This was anticipated to then produce behavioral change. Now there is a rapidly expanding use of attribution therapy, with the potential to deal with a range of clinical problems and populations. This is illustrated in the chapters by Försterling, López, and Wolkenstein, and Amirkhan...
eBook - ePubExpectations and Actions
Expectancy-Value Models in Psychology
- Norman T. Feather, Norman T. Feather(Authors)
- 2021(Publication Date)
- Routledge(Publisher)
...In the present chapter this general conception of behavior is elucidated. I first examine the theory as it applies to achievement strivings, for the achievement arena remains the focus of the conception. The discussion of achievement embraces diverse topics, such as skill versus chance settings, self-concept maintenance, reinforcement schedules, risk-preference, and behavioral change programs. Then additional areas of psychological research that document the range of the conception—hyperactivity, mastery, parole decisions, affiliation and loneliness, and depression—are presented. THE SEARCH FOR CAUSES A basic assumption of Attribution Theory, that sets it apart from pleasure-pain theories of motivation, is that the search for understanding is the (or a) basic “spring of action.” This does not imply that humans are not pleasure seekers, or that they never bias information in the pursuit of hedonic goals. Rather, information seeking and veridical processing are believed to be normative, may be manifested in spite of a conflicting pleasure principle, and, at the least, comprehension stands with hedonism among the primary sources of motivation (see Meyer, Folkes, & Weiner, 1976). In an achievement setting such as the classroom, the search for understanding often leads to the attributional question of “Why did I succeed or fail?” or, more specifically, “Why did I flunk math?” or “Why did Mary get a better mark on this exam than me?” But classrooms are environments for the satisfaction of motivations other than achievement. Thus, attributional questions also might pertain to, for example, interpersonal acceptance or rejection, such as “Why doesn’t Johnny like me?” Among the unknowns of this attributional analysis is a clear statement of when people ask “why” questions. It has been demonstrated that this search is more likely given failure (rejection) than success (acceptance) (Folkes, 1978)...
