Basic Sources Of Attribution Error
Contents |
messages) This article possibly contains original research. Please improve it by verifying the claims made and adding inline citations. Statements fundamental attribution error definition consisting only of original research should be removed. (February 2015) (Learn fundamental attribution error examples how and when to remove this template message) This article relies too much on references to primary
Defensive Attribution
sources. Please improve this by adding secondary or tertiary sources. (February 2015) (Learn how and when to remove this template message) (Learn how and when to remove this
Ultimate Attribution Error
template message) In social psychology, the fundamental attribution error, also known as the correspondence bias or attribution effect, is the tendency for people to place an undue emphasis on internal characteristics of the agent (character or intention), rather than external factors, in explaining another person's behavior in a given situation. This contrasts with interpreting one's own dispositional attribution behavior, where situational factors are more easily recognized and can be taken into account. Contents 1 Examples 2 Details 3 Classic demonstration study: Jones and Harris (1967) 4 Explanations 5 Cultural differences in the error 6 Versus correspondence bias 7 See also 7.1 Cognitive biases 8 References 9 Further reading 10 External links Examples[edit] As a simple example, consider a situation where Alice, a driver, is about to pass through an intersection. Her light turns green and she begins to accelerate, but another car drives through the red light and crosses in front of her. The fundamental attribution error may lead her to think that the driver of the other car was an unskilled or reckless driver. This will be an error if the other driver had a good reason for running the light, such as rushing a patient to the hospital. If this is the case and Alice had been driving the other car, she would have understood that the situation called for speed at the
opinions of experts. Please help improve it by rewriting it in an encyclopedic style. (December 2012) (Learn how and when to remove this template message) In psychology, an attribution bias or attributional bias is a cognitive
Fundamental Attribution Error Quizlet
bias that refers to the systematic errors made when people evaluate or try actor observer bias to find reasons for their own and others' behaviors.[1][2][3] People constantly make attributions regarding the cause of their own and others' self serving bias behaviors; however, attributions do not always accurately mirror reality. Rather than operating as objective perceivers, people are prone to perceptual errors that lead to biased interpretations of their social world.[4][5] Attribution biases were first discussed https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fundamental_attribution_error in the 1950s and 60s by psychologists such as Fritz Heider, who studied attribution theory.[1] Other psychologists, such as Harold Kelley and Ed Jones expanded Heider's early work by identifying conditions under which people are more or less likely to make different types of attributions. Attribution biases are present in everyday life, and therefore are an important and relevant topic to study. For example, when a driver cuts us off, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attribution_bias we are more likely to attribute blame to the reckless driver (e.g., "What a jerk!"), rather than situational circumstances (e.g., "Maybe they were in a rush and didn’t notice me"). Additionally, there are many different types of attribution biases, such as the ultimate attribution error, fundamental attribution error, actor-observer bias, and hostile attribution bias. Each of these biases describes a specific tendency that people exhibit when reasoning about the cause of different behaviors. Since the early work, researchers have continued to examine how and why people exhibit biased interpretations of social information.[2][6] Many different types of attribution biases have been identified, and more recent psychological research on these biases has examined how attribution biases can subsequently affect emotions and behavior.[7][8][9] Contents 1 History 1.1 Attribution theory 1.1.1 Fritz Heider 1.1.2 Jones & Davis 1.1.3 Harold Kelley 1.2 Biased attributions 1.2.1 Cognitive explanation 1.2.2 Motivational explanation 2 Current theory 3 Limitations of the theory 4 Types 4.1 Fundamental attribution error 4.2 Actor-observer bias 4.3 Self-serving bias 4.4 Hostile attribution bias 5 Consequences for behavior 5.1 Aggression 5.2 Intergroup relations 5.3 Academic achievement 6 List of attributional biases 7 See also 8 References 9 Further reading 10 External links History[edit] Attribution theory[edit] Research on attribution biases is founded
Example | So What? | See also | References Description When we are trying to understand and explain what happens in social settings, we http://changingminds.org/explanations/theories/fundamental_attribution_error.htm tend to view behavior as a particularly significant factor. We then tend to explain behavior in terms of internal disposition, such as personality traits, abilities, motives, etc. as opposed to external situational factors. This can be due to our focus on the person more than their situation, about which we may know very little. We also know little about attribution error how they are interpreting the situation. Western culture exacerbates this error, as we emphasize individual freedom and autonomy and are socialized to prefer dispositional factors to situational ones. When we are playing the role of observer, which is largely when we look at others, we make this fundamental attribution error. When we are thinking about ourselves, however, we will tend fundamental attribution error to make situational attributions. Research Edward Jones and Victor Harris (1967) asked people to assess a person's pro- or anti-Castro feelings given an essay a person had written. Even when the people were told the person had been directed to write pro- or anti- arguments, the people still assumed the author believed what they were writing. Example I assume you have not done much today because you are lazy, rather than perhaps tired or lack the right resources. So what? Using it Beware of people blaming you for things outside of your control. Also watch out for people doing it to you. You can make friends and build trust when individuals are blamed by others, by showing that you understand how it is not to do with their personality. Defending Watch how others make attributions. When they seem to go against the trend and be in your favor, be curious about their motives. See also Actor-Observer Difference, Attribution Theory, Correspondence Bias, Correspondent Inference Theory, Covariation Model, Positivity Effect, Ultimate Attribution Error References Heider (1958), Ross (1977), Jo