## Attribution Theories :label: <!-- Put the link to this slide here so people can follow --> **Rizqy Amelia Zein** Department of Personality and Social Psychology Universitas Airlangga slides: https://hackmd.io/@ameliazein/kogsos-4 ---  To download the slides (.pdf), swipe down and click :printer: icon. ---  --- ## Attribution :label: <div style="text-align: left"> * People **==construct explanations==** for both ==physical== phenomena (e.g. earthquakes, the seasons) and ==human behaviour== (e.g. anger, a particular attitude). * In general such explanations are **==causal explanations==**, in which specific conditions are attributed a causal role. * Causal explanations are particularly powerful bases for ==**prediction and control**== ([Hilton, 2007](https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2007-11239-010)). </div> --- ## Attribution :label: <div style="text-align: left"> * **==Attribution==** :point_right: The process of ==assigning a cause to our own behaviour==, and that of others. * Involving :five: different sets of theory: - Heider’s (1958) [theory of naive psychology](https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2004-21806-000) - Jones and Davis’s (1965) [theory of correspondent inference](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0065260108601070#:~:text=To%20say%20that%20an%20inference,be%20informative%20about%20the%20actor.) </div> --- ## Attribution :label: <div style="text-align: left"> * Kelley’s (1967) [covariation model](https://psycnet.apa.org/record/1968-13540-001) * Schachter’s (1964) [theory of emotional lability](https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/BF02979253) * Bem’s (1967, 1972) [theory of self-perception](https://psycnet.apa.org/record/1967-13584-001) </div> --- ### Naive Psychologist (Heider, 1958) :person_frowning: <div style="text-align: left"> * **==Naive psychologist model==** :point_right: Model of social cognition that characterises people as using ==rational, scientific-like==, cause–effect analyses to understand their world. * Heider believed that people are ==intuitive psychologists== who **==construct causal theories==** of human behaviour. </div> --- ### Naive Psychologist (Heider, 1958) :person_frowning: <div style="text-align: left"> * Because we feel that our own behaviour is ==motivated rather than random==, we look for the **causes** for other people’s behaviour in order to **==discover their motives==**. - Remember **illusory correlation**:exclamation: * Because we construct causal theories in order to be able to predict and control the environment, we tend to **==look for stable and enduring properties==** of the world around us. </div> --- ### Naive Psychologist (Heider, 1958) :person_frowning: <div style="text-align: left"> * In attributing causality for behaviour, we distinguish between **==personal factors==** (e.g. personality, ability) and **==environmental factors==** (e.g. situations, social pressure). * However, people tend to be biased in **==preferring internal==** to external attributions even in the face of evidence for external causality. </div> --- ### Naive Psychologist (Heider, 1958) :person_frowning: <div style="text-align: left"> * **==Internal (or dispositional) attribution==** :point_right: Process of assigning the cause of our own or others’ behaviour to **==internal or dispositional==** factors. * **==External (or situational) attribution==** :point_right: Assigning the cause of our own or others’ behaviour to **==external or environmental==** factors. </div> --- ### Correspondence inferences (Jones & Davis, 1965) :repeat: <div style="text-align: left"> * **==Correspondence inference==** :point_right: causal attribution of behaviour to **==underlying dispositions or personality trait==**; how we infer, e.g. that a friendly action is due to an underlying disposition to be friendly. </div> --- ### Correspondence inferences (Jones & Davis, 1965) :repeat: <div style="text-align: left"> * A dispositional cause is ==**a stable cause**== that makes people’s behaviour predictable and thus increases our own sense of control over our world. * To make a correspondent inference, we draw on :five: sources of information. </div> --- ### Correspondence inferences (Jones & Davis, 1965) :repeat: <div style="text-align: left"> :one: **==Freely chosen behaviour==** is more indicative of a disposition. :two: Behaviour with effects that are **==exclusive to that behaviour==** (i.e. behaviour with non-common effects) tells us more about dispositions. :three: **==Socially desirable behaviour==** tells us little about a person’s disposition, because it is likely to be controlled by societal norms. </div> --- ### Correspondence inferences (Jones & Davis, 1965) :repeat: <div style="text-align: left"> :four: We make more confident correspondent inferences about others’ behaviour that has **==important consequences for ourselves==**: that is, behaviour that has *==hedonic relevance==*. :five: We make more confident correspondent inferences about others’ behaviour that seems to be **==directly intended to benefit or harm us==**: that is, behaviour that is *==high in personalism==*. </div> ---  --- ### Covariation model (Kelley, 1967) :male-scientist: <div style="text-align: left"> * In trying to discover the causes of behaviour, people act much like :female-scientist:. * We identify what **==factor covaries==** most closely with the behaviour and then **==assign to that factor a causal role==**. * People use this covariation principle to **==decide==** whether to attribute behaviour to internal dispositions (e.g. personality) or external environmental factors (e.g. social pressure). </div> --- ### Covariation model (Kelley, 1967) :male-scientist: <div style="text-align: left"> * In order to make this decision, people assess :three: classes of information associated with the co-occurrence of: - A certain action (e.g. *angry*) - By a specific person (e.g. *bu Amel*) - With a potential cause (e.g. *a daughter*). </div> --- ### Covariation model (Kelley, 1967) :male-scientist: <div style="text-align: left"> :one: **==Consistency information==** - does bu Amel always get her daughter (high consistency) at Ayesha, or only sometimes (low consistency)? :two: **==Distinctiveness information==** - does bu Amel get angry at everyone in her household (low distinctiveness) or only at her daughter (high distinctiveness)? </div> --- ### Covariation model (Kelley, 1967) :male-scientist: <div style="text-align: left"> :three: **==Consensus information==** - does bu Amel's spouse also get angry at their daughter (high consensus), or only bu Amel who does (low consensus)? </div> ---  --- ## Drawbacks :cry: <div style="text-align: left"> * If people do attribute causality on the basis of covariance or correlation, then they certainly are naive scientists (Hilton, 1988) – **==covariation is not causation==**. * We may have **==incomplete information or even no information==** from multiple observations, then how do we now attribute causality? </div> --- ## Drawbacks :cry: <div style="text-align: left"> * To solve this, [Kelley (1973)](https://psycnet.apa.org/record/1973-24800-001) introduced the notion of **==causal schemata==**. - Which is.. **beliefs or preconceptions, acquired from experience**, about how ==certain kinds of cause interact== to produce a specific effect. - One such schema is that a particular effect requires ==**at least two causes**== (called the ‘multiple necessary cause’ schema). </div> --- ### Emotional lability (Schachter, 1964) :lemon: <div style="text-align: left"> * Causal attribution may play a role in how we experience emotions. * Emotions have :two: distinct components: - An undifferentiated state of **==physiological arousal==**, and; - **==Cognitions==** that label the arousal and determine which emotion is experienced. </div> ---  --- ### Emotional lability (Schachter, 1964) :lemon: <div style="text-align: left"> * If emotions depend on what cognitive label is assigned, through causal attribution to undifferentiated arousal.. * ..then it might be possible to transform depression into cheerfulness simply by **==reattributing arousal==** (the misattribution paradigm). </div> --- ### Emotional lability (Schachter, 1964) :lemon: <div style="text-align: left"> * People who feel anxious and bad about themselves because they **==attribute arousal internally==** are encouraged to attribute arousal to external factors. </div> --- ## However.. :shushing_face: <div style="text-align: left"> * Environmental cues are **==not readily accepted==** as bases for inferring emotions from **==unexplained arousal==**. - Because unexplained arousal is intrinsically **==unpleasant==**, people have a tendency to assign it a negative label. * The misattribution effect is **unreliable, short-lived** and largely **restricted** to laboratory studies ([Parkinson, 1985](https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/BF00992474)). </div> --- ### Self-perception theory (Bem, 1967) :selfie: <div style="text-align: left"> * One significant implication of treating emotion as cognitively labelled arousal is the possibility that people make more **==general attributions for their own behaviour==**. * **==Self-perception theory==** :point_right: idea that we gain knowledge of ourselves only by making self-attributions. - e.g. we infer our own attitudes from our own behaviour. </div> --- ### Task performance attribution :female-construction-worker: <div style="text-align: left"> * ..the causes and consequences of the attribution people make for how well they and others **==perform on a task==**. - e.g. success or failure in an examination (Weiner, 1986). * In making an achievement attribution, we consider :three: performance dimensions. * These produce :eight: different types of explanation for task performance. </div> --- ### Task performance attribution :female-construction-worker: <div style="text-align: left"> :one: **==Locus==** – is the performance caused by the actor (internal) or by the situation (external)? :two: **==Stability==** – is the internal or external cause a stable or unstable one? :three: **==Controllability==** – to what extent is future task performance under the actor’s control? </div> ---  --- ### Thank you! :tada: Should you have any questions, drop them in: - [Spreadsheet](https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1LqcvLnfamGoE3rxKFg9eVtttMbmkPfcF7OxMY1yVGYM/edit?usp=sharing); or - [Drop-in session (every Friday at 11-12)](https://meet.google.com/iis-oxiz-emc); or - [Email](mailto:amelia.zein@psikologi.unair.ac.id)