Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
The first focus of Kelley's research was a look at external and internal attributions. [11] His second focus was determining whether the procedure to arrive at external and internal attributes was related to experimental methodology. [11] Kelley later turned this idea into his covariation model/principle.
Dispositional attribution (or internal attribution or personal attribution) is a phrase in personality psychology that refers to the tendency to assign responsibility for others' behaviors due to their inherent characteristics, such as their personality, beliefs, or ability, instead of attributing it to external (situational) influences such as the individual's environment or culture. [1]
As early researchers explored the way people make causal attributions, they also recognized that attributions do not necessarily reflect reality and can be colored by a person's own perspective. [6] [12] Certain conditions can prompt people to exhibit attribution bias, or draw inaccurate conclusions about the cause of a given behavior or outcome.
Making attributions using consensus, distinctiveness, and consistency [ edit ] According to Hewstone and Jaspars (1987), we are able to determine whether a person would likely make a personal (internal), stimulus (external) or circumstantial attribution by assessing the levels of consensus, distinctiveness, and consistency in a given situation:
Inferences can occur spontaneously if the behavior implies a situational or dispositional inference, while causal attributions occur much more slowly. [41] It has also been suggested that correspondence inferences and causal attributions are elicited by different mechanisms.
more internal attribution for positive acts, and less internal attribution for negative acts, by ingroup than outgroup members; more attribution of outgroup members' failures to lack of ability, and more explaining away of outgroup members' successes; a preference for ingroup-serving versus outgroup-serving attributions for group differences.
[37] The coding of the newspaper accounts showed that there was a "tendency to make internal attributions for success and external attributions for failure" which supports the self-serving bias as about 75% of the attributions from winning teams were internal while about 55% of attributions from losing teams were internal. [37]
The purpose of this theory is to explain why people make internal or external attributions. People compare their actions with alternative actions to evaluate the choices that they have made, and by looking at various factors they can decide if their behaviour was caused by an internal disposition.