Principles of attribution theories - Essay Example

? Principles of attribution theories Principles of attribution theories Introduction Attribution can be linked to something withinan individual that is observable (such as personality/dispositional attribution) or can be something that is external to the individual that people observe (such as their situation/situational attribution). Attribution theory addresses how the social perceiver utilizes information to arrive at casual explanations for events. Attribution theory represents one of the categories of social psychology established by Fritz Heider, Harold Kelly, and Edward E. Jones. The ability to make attributions awards order and predictability in individuals’ lives and aids individuals to cope (Baron, Branscombe, & Byrne, 2009). The theory elaborates on the manner in which individuals interprets the case of events, as well as the behavior of self and others. The paper explores the principles that people utilize in explaining everyday social behavior and events Theories of attribution Naive psychology of the layperson Heider (1958) stipulated that individuals can be perceived as naive psychologists attempting to make sense of the social world. Usually, people tend to find the cause and effect relationships even in circumstances where there is none. In the theory, Heider maintained that individuals observe, analyze, an elaborate on behaviors with explanations. Although individuals manifest diverse forms of explanations to the events of human behaviors, Heider unearthed that it was essential to group explanation into two groups: internal (personal) and external (situational) attributions. When an internal attribution may be registered, the cause of the outline behavior can be assigned to the individual’s characteristics such as efforts, mood, personality, attitude, or disposition (Weiner, 1985). When an external attribution manifests, the cause of a certain behavior allocated to the situation in which the behavior may be viewed as the task, or luck. Correspondent inference Theory According to Jones et al., individuals make inferences by reviewing the context of behavior as directed by three variables, namely: expectedness of behavior; degree of choice; and, effects of an individual’s behaviors (Jones, 1979). Jones et al. established this line of theorizing. For instance, relationally abusive or aggressive men tend to link their violence to variables that were external to them such as wife’s jealousy. Majority of the external factors can be perceived to be correspondent since abusive men appear to link such causes to deliberate and negative variables in their partners. Such attributions mirror men’s thinking, instead of what prompted the behavior. Covariation and configuration Theory The co-variation principle outlines that individuals attribute behavior to the variables that are manifest when behavior occurs, and absent when it fails. The theory assumes that individuals make causal attributions within a rational, logical fashion, and attribute the origin of an action to the factor that co-varies most strongly with that action. Attributions may not be limited to only disposition; Kelly’s explanation postulates that events can be attributed to causes with which they co-occur or co-vary (Kelley & Michela, 1980). Causes can be connected to factors that are manifest when an effect is observed, or fails to occur. The covariation model outlines three core forms of information to render an attribution decision, and observe an individual’s behavior (Gilbert & Malone, 1995). The three forms of information include consensus information; distinctiveness information; and, consistency information. Comparison of Attribution Theories Heider highlighted two core ideas that he outlined and became influential: when individuals elaborate on behavior of others, they seek enduring internal attributions such as personality traits. (2) When individuals attempt to elaborate their own behavior, they tend to render external attributions such as environment or situation (Weiner, 2008). Heider emphasized the need for individuals to comprehend transient events by linking them to actor’s disposition or the characteristics of the environment. Kelly, in the same way as Heider, presumes that when individuals are shaping an attribution, they gather information that will aid them make a decision. Kelly attempted to elaborate on the manner in which individuals view internal and external attribution. The core principle of co-variation model outline that the effect can be attributed to one of the causes that covaries overtime. This implies that the behavior at diverse occasions differs. Kelly asserts that when individuals make causal attributions, they usually analyze information by appraising whether the behavior manifest in the presence or absence of diverse potential causes. The correspondent inference theory, on the other hand, explains why individuals infer the disposition of another individual based on that person’s actions, irrespective of what the action attained or any situation factors. The perceiver compares action based on whether: the action is necessary; if any section of the action is unexpected; if the action is socially desirable; whether the action impacts the perceiver; and, whether the action of personal interest to the perceiver (Hogg & Vaughan, 2008). Correspondent inferences can be regularly drawn even in cases where people’s actions to be unintentional and the processes engaged in drawing inferences regarding others’ behavior are more intricate that implied within correspondent inference theory. The Limitations of attribution theories' accounts The theories fail to account for the inaccuracies that manifest in attribution including misplaced blame (as demonstrated by eyewitness accounts) and blinding individuals to other causes (Goldinger, Kleider, Azuma, & Beike, 2003). As individuals seek to explain the motives and causes for behaviors, they may be predisposed to falling victim to several cognitive biases and errors. Individuals’ perceptions of events can be distorted by past experiences, expectations, and needs. Some of the errors linked to errors in attribution entail: self-serving bias. Researchers assert that the behavior of blaming failure and disappointment to external variables can be linked to the urge to safeguard self-esteem. The fundamental attribution error explains why people tend to attribute causes to internal variables such as personality characteristics, and disregard or reduce external factors. This phenomenon appears to be prominent, especially among individualistic cultures; although, situational variables may be present individuals automatically attribute the causes to internal variables. The fundamental attribution error elaborates why individuals blame others for things over which the mainly have no control (Howard, 1985). The actor-observer bias explains why individuals are highly likely to blame external forces instead of personal characteristics (actor-observer bias). Conclusion Attribution theory responds to the manner in which information is gathered and combined to shape a causal judgment. The first of the three classic attribution theories entail Frit Heider’s (1958) theory of naive psychology in which the lay person is perceived as a naive scientist who connects internal and external attributions. Correspondent theory explores how individuals utilize information regarding other’s behavior in an attempt to unearth the underpinning personality traits or dispositions. The last attribution theory is Kelley’s (1967) covariation model where Kelly believes that individuals act like scientists, whereby they are interested in on whether others’ behavior derives from internal or external causes. References Baron, R. A., Branscombe, N. R., & Byrne, D. (2009). Social psychology, 12th ed. London, UK: Pearson. Goldinger, S. D., Kleider, H.M, Azuma, T., & Beike, D.R. (2003). Blaming the victim" under memory load. Psychological Science 3 (1), 53-61. Hewstone, M. (1989). Causal attribution: From cognitive processes to collective beliefs. Oxford, UK: Basil Blackwell. Hogg, M. & Vaughan, G. (2008). Social Psychology. New Jersey, NJ: Prentice Hall.  Gilbert, D. T., & Malone, P. S. (1995). The correspondence bias. Psychological Bulletin 117 (1), 21-38. Howard, J. A. (1985). Further appraisal of correspondent inferece theory. Personality and Social Psychology Buletin 11 (4), 467-477. Jones, E. E. (1979). The rocky road from acts to dispositions. American Psychologist 34 (1),107-117. Kelley, H. H., & Michela, J. L. (1980). Attribution theory and research. Annual Review of Psychology 31, 457-501. Weiner, B. (1985). An attributional theory of achievement motivation and emotion. Psychological Review 92 (4), 548-573. Weiner, B. (2008). Reflections on the history of attribution theory and research. Social Psychology 39 (3), 151–156 Read More