Attribution

1
Attribution

• Lecture 5

2
Inferring causal relations
http//cogweb.ucla.edu/Discourse/Narrative/michott
e-demo.swf
Baron Albert Michotte (University of Leuven) The
perception of causality (1945)
3
People see causality everywhere Fritz Heider
Mary Ann Simmel (mid-40s.)
http//cogweb.ucla.edu/Discourse/Narrative/heider-
simmel-demo.swf
Fritz Heider (1896-1988)
4
Attribution

• Beginnings Fritz Heider (1958) "Psychology of
  interpersonal relationships"
• Atribuere to ascribe (e.g., to ascribe traits)
• Here? attribution ascription of causes
• Attribution theories naive theories of
  causality. How people explain own and others
  behaviors

5
ATTRIBUTION vs ATTRIBUTIONAL theories
Kelley i Michela (1980)
Attribution theories
Attributional theories
6
What do we mean when we ask the why question?

• Intentional (symbol meaning)
• What does one mean by that?
• Teleological (goal means)
• What does one try to achieve with it?
• Causal (physical causation) (cause effect)
• What caused it?
• Functional (function structure)
• What function does it play?
• Genetic (genesis consequence)
• How came?
• Nomothetic (law example)
• Which law can be applied?

7
Main attribution theories

• Fritz Heiders theory (1958)
• Correspondent Inference Theory - Jones Davis
  (1965)
• Self-attribution theory- Daryl Bem
• Harold Kelleys attributional cube
• Denis Hiltons Abnormal Conditions Model
• Theory of Arie Kruglanski

8
Fritz Heider (1896-1988)
Theory of naive causality Consistency (balance)
theory
9
Fritz Heider (1958)

• Initiated interest in naive theories of causality
• Attribution as perception inference from
  probablistic cues
• Distinction between internal (personal) and
  external (situational) causes
• Actions may be intentional or unintentional.
  Attribution understanding of intentions.
• Attribution biases, including fundamental
  attribution error (1921) behavior fills whole
  perceptual field

10
Correspondent Inference Theory Edward E. Jones
Keith Davis (1965)

• Attribution - finding correspondence between
  behavior and intentions
• Two stages in inference
• Intention identification
• Attribution of dispositions
• Dispositions inferred from attributed intentions
• Conditions necessary for inferring intentions
• Actors knowledge of behavior consequences
• Actors freedom of choice
• Attribution of intentions ? attribution of
  disposition

11
Factors influencing strength of dispositional
inferences

• Behaviors
• Atypical unconventional, inconsistent with
  expectations
• Negative

12
Experiment by E.E. Jones Harris (1967)

• 60s, war between the US and Cuba
• American students evaluate essays (purportedly)
  written by other students on Fidel Castro
• Half positive, half-negative
• Essays of half of each group presented as written
  under pressure, another half free-willingly

13
Conditions
essay
Pro-Castro
Anti-Castro
pressure
yes
no
14
Task

• Estimate persons attitude toward Castro

15
Estimated attitude towards Castro
essay
Pro-Castro
Anti-Castro
pressure
44.1
22.87
yes
17.38
59.62
no
16
Estimated attitude towards Castro
17
Attribution of responsibility 

• Hedonism principle attribution of responsibility
  stronger when consequences have hedonic value
• Personalism principle attribution of
  responsibility stronger when consequences are
  personally relevant 

18
Self-attribution theory Daryl Bem (1967)

• Own attitudes and motivations inferred from own
  behaviors
• Overjustification effect (Lepper, Greene i
  Nisbett) Information about external incentive
  lowers attribution to internal factores  
• External vs. internal motivation (Edward Deci)
• Valins effect
• Sleeping pills and arousal 
• Walking over bridge and attraction

19
Why do I date X?

• Mark Zanna et als. study of experienced emotions
• Couples
• Rubins Love Scale
• Replying to one of two questions
• (a) I date him/her because of....."
• (b) I date him/her in order to..."
• Again filling Rubins Love Scale
• Results drop in reported love in (b)

20
Conditions for self-attributional effects?

• Attitude strength and self-attribution
• Stronger effects for weak attitudes
• Stronger effects for attitudes not yet formed
• Practical consequences influencing peoples
  attitudes by making people aware of their own
  behaviors

21
Inferring own and others traits

• Karylowski Niewiarowski (2006)
• Attribution of own traits based on introspective
  information (do I feel honest, wise etc.)
• Attribution of other peoples traits based on
  observation of behaviors (does the person behave
  honestly, wisely etc.)
• Attribution of friends traits in between (both
  internal states and behaviors)

22
Harold H. Kelley(1921-2003)
23
Harold Kelleys attribution theory

• Two theories of attribution
• For replicable events (the cube)
• For unique events (theory of causal schemata)

24
ANOVA model in perception of causality

• Classification of causes

internal
external
person
object
circumstances
25
Subject object and interpretation if behavior
Behavior
Subject
Object
circumstances
26
Attributional cube

• Subject - object - circumstances three sides of
  attrubitional cube

Objectt
circumstancs
Person
27
Cause

• Person (perpetrator is guilty )
• Object (victim is guilty)
• Circumstances (circumstances made the behavior
  easy)
• Interaction between the factors
• Person-object (this perpetrator towards this very
  victim)
• Person-circumstances (this perpetrator in these
  specific circumstances)
• Object-circumstances (this victim in these
  specific circumstances)
• Person-object-circumstances (this perpetrator
  towards this very victim in these specific
  circumstances)

28
Three types of information

• consistency
• How consistent is actors behavior in different
  times and situations
• distinctivenes
• Is the behavior object-specific or does it also
  apply to other objects
• consensus
• How common is the behavior in tthe population

29
Example

• After the first date Ann left Joe for somebody
  else

30
Consistency
Low
High
Ann
Joe
Ann
Joe
It was their first time
Ann did it several times with Joe
31
Distinctiveness
Low
High
George
George
Joe
Ann
Ann
Joe
Bill
Bill
Ann had several steady boyfriends before, only
with Joe it happened like this
Ann always leaves her partners after the first
date
32
Consensus
High
Low
Keith
Keith
Joe
Ann
Ann
Joe
Sarah
Sarah
It happened only with Ann, other girls wanted to
date Joe again
All girls leave Joe after the first date
33
Atrribution to interaction person x object
Consistency- high Distinct high Consensus - low
Cause Interaction of traits of Joe Ann

34
Attribution to persons dispositions
consistency- high distinct low consensus - low
cause dispositions of subject (Ann)

35
Atrribution to object
Consistency high Distinct high Consensus -
high
Cause dispositions of object (Joe)

36
Attribution to circumstances
consistency - low
Cause Properties of circumstances (eg.
Atmosphere, customs)

37
Tests of Kelleys model

• McArthur unequal weights ascribed to the three
  information
• consistency - 20 variance
• distinctiveness - 10
• consensus - 3
• Underestimation of consensus information (study
  by Nisbett, Borgida and others)
• Underestimation of consensus information a
  universal phenomenon?
• Consequences?

38
Tests of Kelleys model

• Other factors influencing attribution
• Evaluation of the outcome (positive or negative)
• Whose behavior is being explained (own or
  others)
• Content of behavior (morality or competence)
• Is behavior intentional or not?

39
Denis Hilton Abnormal Conditions Model
40
Abnormal Conditions Model Denis Hilton

• Reanalysis of the factorial model of Harold
  Kelley
• Which information is missing?

41
Why did Ann leave Joe after the first date?
Factorial schema
-------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------
Person Ann
Other
girls --------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------
---- Object Joe
Other boys Joe Other
boys ---------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------
- Circumstances today other today other
today other today other
-------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------ c
ell ----------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------
--
6
3
4
5
1
2
7
8
consistency
distinctiveness
consensus
???
42
Typicality
High
Low
Keith
Bill
Keith
Bill
Joe
Ann
Ann
Joe
Sarah
Sarah
George
George
Other girls leave their partners after the first
date
Other girls do not leave partners after the first
date
43
Attribution process according to Denis Hilton

• Only abnormal behavior is explained 
• Information about consistency, distinctiveness
  and consensus cues that help identify the
  causes of abnormal states
• Low consensus person
• High distinctiveness object
• Low consistency circumstances

44
Arie W. Kruglanski
45
Theory of causes according to Arie Kruglanski
(1975)

• Four causes according to Aristotle
• Material what is it made of?
• Formal how is it made?
• Efficient who or what made it?
• Final - what has it been made for?
• Different types of explanation teleological vs.
  mechanistic

46
Arie W. Kuglanski

• ACTIONS versus OCCURRENCES
• Actions
• Endogenous a goal in itself
• Exogenous instrumental with respect to the
  goal 

47
Attributions for actions and occurrences
differ

• Actions intentional
• Occurrences nonintentional
• Occurrences processed according to Kelleys
  model
• Information on consensus
• External attribution more frequent
• Actions
• Focus on consistency
• Endogenous actions more internal attributions
  than exogenous actions

48
X is a paid murderer
Exo-
X when driving, killed Y
X did it ....
Endo-
X did not notice Y
X wife betrayed X with Y X took revenge
Efficient cause
Final cause (reason for)
49
Causes versus reasons

• Cause why something was done (who or what did
  it)
• Reason reason why the action was taken (what
  for)
• Distinction A.R. Buss (1978)
• Locke Pennington (1982) possible causes of
  behavior

50
Causes of behavior according to Locke
Pennington (1982)
causes
internal
(1) external
I was asked to
(2) dispositions
reasons
I am an orderly person
(3) psychological
(4) situational
Why did you clean your desk?
Could not find anything here
There was a mess
51
Attribution through communication
52
Brown Fish (1983) action vs. state verbs

• Action verbs point to the SUBJECT
• State verbs point to the OBJECT

53
Action vs. state verbs

• Keith HELPS Joe (action verb) ? Keith is the
  cause
• Keith LIKES Joe (state verb) ? Joe is the cause

54
Action vs. state verbs

• Cause the factor that better differentiates
  people
• People differ more in willingness to act (e.g.
  help others) that the disposition to be the
  recipient of the act (e.g. be helped)
• People differ more in the disposition to arouse
  emotions (e.g. be liked) than the disposition to
  experience emotion (e.g. liking others)

55
Use in manipulation

• Why do you vote for party X?
• Cause the voter
• Why do you like the party X
• Cause the party

56
Biases and errors in attribution
57
Assumptions of Kelleys model

• That information on consistency, distinctiveness
  and consensus has equal weight
• That attributions do not depend on whose behavior
  is explained
• That attributions do not depend on the value of
  the behavior (positive or negative)
• That people can correctly estimate unconditional
  probabilities

58
Fundamental attribution error

• Attributing causes of behavior to dispositions
  (he is like that") and intentions (he intended
  to do this") instead of to a situation or to a
  target object
• Gustav Ischeiser (1949) Misunderstandings in
  human relations. A study in false social
  perception.
• Fritz Heider (1921) oral information (1958)
  Behavior fills the perceptual field
• Lee Ross (1977) fundamental attribution error

59
(No Transcript)
60
Fundamental attribution error - causes

• Understimating the role of consensus information
• Quattrone anchoring heuristics
• Attribution anchored in the subject of behavior,
  insufficiently corrected for situational
  information

61
Causes (cont)

• Daniel Gilbert Malone correspondence bias
• Role of cognitive business Correspondence bias
  smaller when cognitive resources were not enaged
• Replication of the experiment by Jones Harris
• Fundamental attribution error and cognitive
  development

62
Actor-observer asymmetry

• E. Jones i R. Nisbett (1972) attributions
  different for actor and for observer 
• Own behavior explained with situational factors,
  others behavior with dispositions
• Number of internal attributions similar for
  oneself and others
• I have freedom of choosing my behavior, he/she is
  determined

63
Causes of the actor-observer asymmetry

• Number of information more about determinants of
  own than others behaviors
• Perspective differences (figure - ground) study
  by Storms
• The asymmetry reverses with self-focused
  attention (eg. mirror)
• Buss (1978), Locke i Pennington (1982) causes
  vs. reasons
• People explain own rather than others behaviors
  with situational reasons

64
Language and attributional asymmetry

• Gun Semin Klaus Fiedler verbs vs. adjectives
• Own behaviors described with help of verbs (I
  did this and that), others behaviors with help
  of adjectives (he/she is this or that)
• Happy and unhappy couples

Klaus Fiedler
Gun Semin
65
Egotistic attributions success-failure asymmetry

• Two components
• (a) attributing successes to own dispositions
  (self-enhancement)
• (b) attributing failures to situational factors
  (self-protection)
• More empirical evidence for (a) than (b)
  attributions for successes more uniform than
  attributions for failures

66
Attribution of successes and failures in the past
year
67
Explanations of attributional egotism

• Egotism
• Expectation of success unexpectedness of
  failure
• Kruglanski actions (successes) vs. occurrences
  (failures)

68
Other cultures?
Hazel Markus
Shinobu Kitayama
69
H. Markus S. Kitayama attributing causes for
successes and failures
Ss Japanese students
70
Attributional egocentrism

• Michael Ross
• My contribution to common work bigger than
  contributions of others
• Concerns both positive and negative outcomes

71
Attributional egocentrism

• Explanations
• Differential access to information about own and
  others contributions
• Selective encoding of information
• Selective retrieval of information
• Motivational factors
•  
• Most evidence third explanation

72
False consensus effect

• Ross, Greene i House (1977) Overestimation of
  own behaviors and attitudes in population
• Particularly visible if
• we are uncertain of the behavior value
• The behavior is positive
• we are in the minority

73
False consensus effect - explanations

• Different access to own and others behaviors and
  attitudes
• Salience and perceptual accessibility of wn
  attitudes and behaviors higher
• Validating own beliefs
• if I belive in it ? it must be true
• if it is true ? others have to believe in it as
  well
• Egotism The more common behavior, the less
  negative 

74
Explanations (cont.)

• False consensus effect as statistical artifact
• Regression to the mean overestimation of rare
  behaviors/attitudes, underestimation of frequent
  behaviors
• Robyn Dawes justified heuristic in the face of
  lack of information ? inferrring from own
  attitudes ? self-projection

75
Functions of attributions

• When do people spontaneously ask why question?
• Negative events
• Unexpected events
• Functions of attributions
• Control
• Prediction
• Self-esteem

76
Attributional theories

• Attributional theory of achievement motivation
  (Bernard Weiner)
• Attributional theory of emotions (Bernard Weiner)
• Attributional theory of depression (Seligman,
  Teasdale Abramson)
• Attributional explanations of intrinsic
  motivation (E. Deci, R. Ryan)
• Attributional effects in attraction
• Self-handicapping