PSY 223 1st Edition Lecture 8Outline of Last Lecture I. Understanding and Perceiving OthersII. Snap JudgmentsIII. Halo-effect of physical attractivenessIV. Nonverbal communicationOutline of Current Lecture II. AttributionsA. Fritz Heider theoryB. Jones’ Correspondent Inference TheoryC. Harold Kelley’s Covariation TheoryIII. Fundamental Attribution ErrorIV. Actor-Observer DifferencesV. Motivational Biases and Influences on AttributionsVI. Self-esteem and Influences on AttributionsVII. Culture and Attribution BiasCurrent LectureAttributionsAttribution is when you try to determine the cause of something. We try to understand others and predict their future behaviors. Ask “why” for something unusual—like if someone stood up in class and screamed a profanity. Wonder why they just did that and we do this because we want to predict Fritz Heider- We are all amateur scientists who try to understand others- We make either an internal (personal) attribution or an external (situational) attributionPersonal—making attribution about the person (did that because they are weird)These 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.External—blame it on the environment/situation (did that because a bee just stung them)o We make internal attributions more than externalJones’ Correspondent Inference TheoryWants to know when we make internal attributionsInternal attributions more common when…..- It appears that the person feely choose their behavior (no internal or external award for doing behavior)- The behavior is unexpected (goes against the norm)- When the behavior results in a small number of unique, desirable outcomes Harold 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 and situations-Theory says that what is critical is a covariation principle: in order for something to be the cause of a behavior, it must be present when the behavior occurs and absent when it does not3 types:- Consensus: what most people would do in the situationEx. Someone comes out of movie theatre and raves about film. Do you make attribution that the movie is the reason (external) and the person is an excited person (internal)- Distinctiveness: what the individual does in other situationsEx. Ask them about that specific movie (external) or see what they do after other movies (internal)- Consistency: what individual does in a given situation on different occasionsEx. Have them watch same movie weeks later and see reaction **this is why although covariation theory is helpful it is unrealistic---because can’t get all this informationevery single time**When consensus, distinctiveness, and consistency high then then type of attribution is external--When opposite (all are low) then is it internal The Fundamental Attribution Error (FAE)People are more likely to make internal than external attributions for others’ behaviors. First identified by Ross (1977)Explanation for F.A.E:- Perceptual salience: often attribute things to what appears to be most obvious cause (the personal is more salient than the context)—forget person was randomly assigned to answer trivia questions when you think of them as dumb- Automatic Cognitive Processing: dispositional attributions are often made automatically. Situational attributions require more cognitive thought 2 step attribution process Gilbert & Malone, 1995)Step 1: Internal attribution made automaticallyStep 2: Adjust by taking into account the situation (this 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 the dispositional qualities of the actor (FAE)-Is also due to perceptual salience and lack of information about another’s situationMotivational Biases and Influences on AttributionsMotivational Biases: the ways in which our personal needs, wishes, and preferences alter the way we make attributions and perceive situations Ex. Think other person’s fault in car accident because you don’t want to think that you did itWishful Seeing: people have a tendency to see what they want to see- Original study not done very well because methodology was plagued with confounds- Contemporary researchers have returned to the concept with improved methodsEx. Thirsty student perceived water bottle on table close than quenched studentsSelf-esteem affects how we make attributions as well--Use external attribution to say why we did poorly on test (roommate kept us up) but the internal attribution when we do well (I’m so smart)--The False Consensus Effect applies here:- We assume that others share our beliefs and values—can affect behaviors as well (so when outside the norm we apply internal attributions)- We are more likely to favor people who are similar to us (so apply external attributions for them instead of internal)- Ideological motives affect our attributions of othersAlso we view the world as a just place: - We view the world as a place where we “get what we deserve”- If we can’t help a victim, we tent to blame them to preserve this view (think rape victims)o This helps us cope with stress and affirms the belief that our investments will be rewardedo The more threatened we feel by a situation, the more likely we are to blame the victimOther biases and influences on attribution The influence of imagined outcomes: people’s attributions are influence not only by what happened but also by what almost happened or could have happenedCounterfactual thoughts: thoughts about what might have or could have happenedCulture and Attribution Bias-Collectivistic cultures may be more attuned to contextual factors (less likely to commit fundamental attribution error) They usually use external attributions rather than