SOA 223 1nd Edition Lecture 9 Outline of Last Lecture 1. Understanding & Perceiving Others2. Judgments3. DeceptionOutline of Current Lecture 1. Attributions2. Covariation Theories3. Attribution BiasesCurrent LectureAttribution- We try to understand others and predict their future behaviorFritz Heider’s contributions to study of attributions- Claimed we’re all scientists, who try to understand others- Make either an internal (personal) or external (situational) attribution- Usually make more internal attributionsJones’ Correspondent Inference Theory- Internal attributions are more common when…- Appears that the person freely chose the behavior- Behavior is unexpected (goes against norm)- Behavior results in a small number of unique, desirable outcomesHarold Kelley’s Covariation Theory- Focuses on how people decide whether to make an internal or external attribution- Applies to multiple observations of behavior, often across time & situations- Covariation Principle- In order for something to be a cause of behavior, has to be present when behavior occurs & absent when behavior does not occur3 types of Covariation InformationThese notes represent a detailed interpretation of the professor’s lecture. GradeBuddy is best used as a supplement to your own notes, not as a substitute.- Concensus: what most people would do in the situation- Distinctiveness: what the individual does in other situations- Consistency: what the individual does in a given situation in different situationsConsensus Distinctiveness Consistency Type of AttributionHigh High High ExternalLow High High InternalThe Fundamental Attribution Error- People are more likely to make internal attributions about others’ behaviorsIdentified by Ross (1977)Examples: Pro/Con Castro papers, jeopardy Explanations for Fundamental Attribution Error- Perceptual salience: Often attribute things to what appears to be most obvious cause. Person is more salient than context- Automatic Cognitive Processing: Dispositional attributions are often made automatically. Situational attributions require more cognitive thoughtTwo Step Attribution Process- (Gilbert & Malone 1995)Step 1.) Internal attribution automaticallyStep 2.) Adjust by taking into account the situation (takes effort)Actor-Observer Differences- The actor’s tendency is to explain behavior as due to the situation- The observer’s tendency is to explain behavior as due to dispositional qualities of the actor- Also due to Perceptual Salience and lack of info about another’s situationOther Biases & Influences on Attributions- Influence of imagined outcomes: People’s attributions are influenced not only by what happenedbut also by what almost happened or could have happenedo Counterfactual thoughts- Thoughts about what might have, could have happened “If only…”- Motivational Biases- Ways which our personal needs, wishes & preferences after the way we make attributions and perceive situationsWishful Seeing- People have a tendency to see what they want to see- Original studies not done very wello Methodology was plagued with confoundso Contemporary researchers have returned to the concept with improved methods- Example: Thirsty students perceived water on table closer than quenched studentsThe Need for Self- Esteem- False Consensus Effect applies here: We assume that others share our beliefs & valuesThis affects behaviors- We are more likely to favor people who are similar to us- Ideological Motives affect our attributions of othersBelief in a Just World- We view the world as a place where we “get what we deserve”- If we cannot help a victim, we tend to blame them to preserve this view- Helps us cope with stress & affirms the belief that our investments will be rewarded. Personal Contact- The more threatened we feel by a situation, the more likely we are to blame the victimoCulture & Attribution Biases- Collectivistic cultures are more likely to make external