Word count: XXXXXXXXXXwords.Purpose:This Assessment serves two main purposes. First, it examines Students' ability to articulate core concepts and their relevance to the understanding of social...

Word count: 400 - 600 words.

L2, V2 Attribution Theories ATS1262: UNDERSTANDING SOCIAL BEHAVIOUR DR JOHN GARDNER 1 Lecture 2: Video 2 Attribution theories ATTRIBUTION THEORIES 2 1. Fritz Heider, founding work in attribution theories • dispositional versus situational attributions 2. Harold Kelley, covariation model • distinctiveness, consistency, consensus Theories that explain how and why people make causal attributions for behaviour (their own, and other people’s) ATTRIBUTION THEORIES 1 Fritz Heider (1958) 3 People generally make dispositional or situational attributions when explaining behaviour • Dispositional attributions = behaviour is attributed to personal dispositions (personality, traits, characteristics internal to the individual) • Situational attributions = behaviour is attributed to external (situational) factors (social context etc.) 4 ATTRIBUTION THEORIES 1 Fritz Heider (1958) Observed behaviour Dispositional Attributions Situational Attributions My friend just ignored me on the bus “She didn’t see me because she is always absent-minded” “She is a shy introvert who hates small talk” “There were so many people on the bus, she just didn’t see me” “She is so worried about a sick relative, she didn’t notice me” A car swerved in front of me “He is a bad driver” “The road is full of potholes” “He was avoiding another car” I did really well in an exam “I’m great at that subject” “I’m naturally intelligent” “I had a great sleep last night” “My friend encouraged me to do lots of study with her” A guy on the tram is wearing a ‘Make America Great Again’ Cap “He is a right-wing Trump supporter” “He must be going to a theme party” “It’s really sunny and that was the only hat he could find” 5 ATTRIBUTION THEORIES 1 Fritz Heider (1958) Why is that young person not social distancing? Dispositional attribution: “She/he is so self-centered, like all millennials” Situational attribution: “There are very few coronavirus cases in that area” AND/OR “It’s spring break and people are in party mode” 6 ATTRIBUTION THEORIES 1 Fritz Heider (1958) Why is that person protesting? Dispositional attribution: “They are a far-left radical” OR “They have a deep commitment to social justice” Situational attribution: “It is such an important issue, many people are protesting” 7 ATTRIBUTION THEORIES 2 Surely this knowledge influences how we make sense of that person’s behaviour? Often we have access to additional knowledge... • We might know the person exhibiting the behaviour • We might know about the context of that behaviour 8 ATTRIBUTION THEORIES 2 Harold Kelley & covariation model (1967) What factors influence our explanations of people’s behaviour? 9 ATTRIBUTION THEORIES 2 Harold Kelley & covariation model (1967) What factors influence our explanations of people’s behaviour? 1. Consensus of the behaviour Do other people also behave in the same way in that situation? If many other people behave in the same way in that situation, then we say that consensus is high. 10 ATTRIBUTION THEORIES 2 Harold Kelley & covariation model (1967) What factors influence our explanations of people’s behaviour? 2. The distinctiveness of the behaviour Is the person’s behaviour unique to that situations? If a person behaves in a similar way in other situations, we say that distinctiveness is low 11 ATTRIBUTION THEORIES 2 Harold Kelley & covariation model (1967) What factors influence our explanations of people’s behaviour? 3. The consistency of the behaviour Does the person always behave that way in that situation? If a person often behaves in that same way in that particular situation, we say that consistency is high 12 ATTRIBUTION THEORIES 2 Harold Kelley & covariation model (1967) When consistency is high (ignored on campus again), distinctiveness is low (always oblivious) and consensus is low (other friends noticed me), we tend to attribute the behaviour to dispositional traits. Example 1: My friend ignored me again on the bus. He is always appears to be oblivious to his surroundings. My other friends noticed me and said ‘hi’” 13 ATTRIBUTION THEORIES 2 Harold Kelley & covariation model (1967) When consistency is low (my friend ignored me on the bus usually talks to me), distinctiveness is high (friend is usually talkative) and consensus is high (other friends also ignored me), we tend to attribute the behaviour to the situation (e.g. the bus was packed – it was too busy & awkward to chat) Example 2: My friend is usually out-going and talkative, he usually talks to me on the bus, but today he just ignored me on the bus. My other friends also ignored me on the bus. 14 ATTRIBUTION THEORIES 2 Harold Kelley & covariation model (1967) Example 3: (Let’s ignore consensus, and focus on consistency and distinctiveness) Let’s assume that you know Susan and her friend Bob very well, and you observe the following behaviour: Susan yells at her friend Bob. • You know that Susan is often angry, so the distinctiveness is low. • But you have never seen Susan yell specifically at Bob, so consistency is also low. 15 ATTRIBUTION THEORIES 2 Harold Kelley & covariation model (1967) From this you might assume while Susan is often angry, something about the situation made her yell at Bob (because she never yells at Bob!). Example 3: (Let’s ignore consensus, and focus on consistency and distinctiveness) Let’s assume that you know Susan and her friend Bob very well, and you observe the following behaviour: Susan yells at her friend Bob. • You know that Susan is often angry, so the distinctiveness is low. • But you have never seen Susan yell specifically at Bob, so consistency is also low. 16 ATTRIBUTION THEORIES 2 Harold Kelley & covariation model (1967) IMPORTANT POINT This is a theory about the type of factors that people consider when they make attributions. It is not a theory about how people ‘weigh-up’ those factors. However, we can make some general assumptions (e.g. that if consensus is high, and distinctiveness is high, in general people are more likely to make a situational attribution). ATS1262: UNDERSTANDING SOCIAL BEHAVIOUR 17 Summary – Attribution Theories: • Fritz Heider: dispositional versus situational • Harold Kelley: Covariation model End of video 2! L2, V1 Attribution - Intro ATS1262: UNDERSTANDING SOCIAL BEHAVIOUR DR JOHN GARDNER 1 Lecture 2: Video 1 Attribution - Introduction ATS1262: UNDERSTANDING SOCIAL BEHAVIOUR 2 Lecture 2: Video 1: Introduction to Attribution Video 2: Attribution Theories Video 3: The Fundamental Attribution Error ATTRIBUTION – What is it? Attribution: the way in which people explain behaviour What do people attribute their behaviour to? What do people attribute other people’s behaviour to? What factors do they explain as causing a behaviour? 3 The study of attribution = the study of lay causal explanations ATTRIBUTION • We all try to explain behaviour (ours and other people’s) “Why did my friend just ignore me?” “Why did I do so well in that exam?” “Why did that car swerve in front of me? “Why is that guy wearing a ’Make America Great Again’ cap?” 4 Ø We constantly formulate lay causal explanations to such questions THE SIGNIFIGANCE OF ATTRIBUTION 1 Why are social scientists interested in lay causal explanations? 1. They reflect our desire to control our surroundings: 5 • By applying ‘cause & effect’ explanations, we acquire a sense of comprehension. • We can make predictions about how people will behave, and plan our own actions accordingly THE SIGNIFIGANCE OF ATTRIBUTION 1 Why are social scientists interested in lay causal explanations? 1. They reflect our desire to control our surroundings: 6 Ø Everyday life as a game of ‘social chess’: We strategically anticipate the move of others, while they strategically anticipate our moves • By applying ‘cause & effect’ explanations, we acquire a sense of comprehension. • We can make predictions about how people will behave, and plan our own actions accordingly THE SIGNIFIGANCE OF ATTRIBUTION 2 Why are social scientists interested in lay causal explanations? 7 2. They have an ego-centric function Ø They reflect biases, prejudices • People’s explanations often serve to protect, maintain, or extend their beliefs about other people & themselves THE SIGNIFIGANCE OF ATTRIBUTION 3 Why are social scientists interested in lay causal explanations? 3. They have interpersonal functions • Explanations aimed at establishing & maintaining desired social relations • Peoples’ explanations for their own behaviour often serve to present themselves favorably to others: 8 THE SIGNIFIGANCE OF ATTRIBUTION 3 Why are social scientists interested in lay causal explanations? 3. They have interpersonal functions • Explanations aimed at establishing & maintaining desired social relations • Peoples’ explanations for their own behaviour often serve to present themselves favorably to others: 9 “Sorry I’m late for the meeting, I was stuck in traffic” implies the following: “Please do not see my lateness as a sign of disrespect towards you, or as sign that I am undependable” THE SIGNIFIGANCE OF ATTRIBUTION 4 Why are social scientists interested in lay causal explanations? 4. Attribution is relevant for motivation & learning 10 • Students who equate success & failure with degree of effort are likely to have more motivation than students who equate success & failure to natural ability. • Student’s attributional styles (i.e. their causal explanations for success & failure) are linked to their motivation and achievement. ATS1262: UNDERSTANDING SOCIAL BEHAVIOUR 11 End of video 1 Summary: 1. Attribution reflects people's desire to control & predict their world 2. Attribution has an egocentric function 3. Attribution has interpersonal functions 4. Attribution is related to motivation & learning L2, V3 FAE ATS1262: UNDERSTANDING SOCIAL BEHAVIOUR DR JOHN GARDNER 1 Lecture 2: Video 3 The Fundamental Attribution Error 2 THE FUNDAMENTAL ATTRIBUTION ERROR So... It turns out that we generally make a common mistake.... 3 THE FUNDAMENTAL ATTRIBUTION ERROR Ø When explaining behaviour, people generally overestimate the power of personals factors (dispositional), and underestimate the power of the situation. So... It turns out that we generally make a common mistake.... We are more likely to think that a behaviour reflects the person’s personality, even when there is evidence that the situation is important. 4 Observed behaviour Dispositional Attributions Situational Attributions My friend just ignored me “She didn’t see me because she is always absent-minded” “She is a shy introvert who hates small talk” “There were so many people around, she just didn’t see me” “She is so worried about a sick relative, she didn’t notice me” A car swerve in front of me “He is a bad driver” “The road is full of potholes” “He was avoiding another car” I did really well in an exam “I’m great at that subject” “I’m naturally intelligent” “I had a great night sleep” “My friend encouraged me to do lots of study with her” A guy on the tram is wearing a ‘Make America Great Again’ Cap “He is a right-wing Trump supporter” “He must be going to theme party” “It’s really sunny and that was the only hat he could find” THE FUNDAMENTAL ATTRIBUTION ERROR We generally make these sorts of explanations 5 THE FUNDAMENTAL ATTRIBUTION ERROR The c lass ic s tudy by Jones & Harr i s 1967 Research participants had to read an essay about a controversial topic, and then infer the attitudes (beliefs) of the person who wrote it. The essays were pro or anti Fidel Castro. Participants were asked: Does the author have positive or negative attitudes towards Fidel Castro? 6 Author had a choice = author supports view in their essay (because the author chose to express that view) Author had no choice = ... ? Jones & Harris hypothesized that the participants’ response would be influenced by their knowledge of whether the author chose to wrote pro or anti essay. THE FUNDAMENTAL ATTRIBUTION ERROR The c lass ic s tudy by Jones & Harr i s 1967 7 THE FUNDAMENTAL ATTRIBUTION ERROR The c lass ic s tudy by Jones & Harr i s 1967 Study found that: Even when participants knew the author had no choice, participants were more likely to assume that the author of a pro Castro essay had pro Castro views. E.g. Participants had a preference for dispositional attributions – they ignored the context in which the author was forced to express that view Author had a choice = author supports view in their essay (because the author chose to express that view) Author had no choice = ... ? Jones & Harris hypothesized that the participants’ response would be influenced by their knowledge of whether the author chose to wrote pro or anti essay. 8 Imagine... That you have to write an essay that argues that Donald Trump was a good President. THE FUNDAMENTAL ATTRIBUTION ERROR The c lass ic s tudy by Jones & Harr i s 1967 You give that essay to a group of strangers to read, and they know you were forced to write an essay that supports Trump According to the Jones & Harris study, many of the strangers would nevertheless assume that you support Donald Trump! 9 THE FUNDAMENTAL ATTRIBUTION ERROR BUT WHY DO WE OFTEN MAKE THIS ERROR?? 1. Situational factors are often hidden, obscured, not apparent to the observer (except when considering our own behaviour: self-serving bias) 10 THE FUNDAMENTAL ATTRIBUTION ERROR BUT WHY DO WE OFTEN MAKE THIS ERROR?? 1. Situational factors are often hidden, obscured, not apparent to the observer (except when considering our own behaviour: self-serving bias) 2. It can require more