fundamental attribution error and actor observer bias

When a behavior is unusual or unexpected, we can more easily make a personal attribution for it. It is easier to make personal attributions in some cases than in others. A situational attribution might be something like “I think they broke up because they were under such financial stress.” At yet other times, we may decide that the behavior was caused by both the person and the situation. A personal attribution might be something like “I think they broke up because Sarah was not committed to the relationship.” At other times, we may determine that the behavior was caused primarily by the situation-we call this making a situational (or external) attribution. We make a personal (or internal or dispositional) attribution when we decide that the behavior was caused primarily by the person. After we have made our observations, we draw our conclusions. We carefully observe the people we are interested in, and we note how they behave in different social situations. Making a causal attribution is a bit like conducting a social psychology experiment.

What could have caused the breakup? Was it something one of them said or did? Or perhaps stress from financial hardship was the culprit? When a couple we know breaks up, despite what seemed to be a match made in heaven, we are naturally curious. Because we cannot see personality, we must work to infer it. The process of trying to determine the causes of people’s behavior is known as causal attribution (Heider, 1958). And perhaps Leslie left a big tip in order to impress her friends rather than because she is truly generous.īecause behavior is determined by both the person and the situation, we must attempt to determine which of these two causes actually determined the behavior. Perhaps Frank hit Joe not because he is really an aggressive person but because Joe insulted or provoked him first. What this means is that the behavior we observe other people engaging in might not always be that reflective of their personality-the behavior might have been caused by the situation rather than by underlying person characteristics. Remember that behavior is influenced by both our personal characteristics and the social context in which we find ourselves. It is Frank’s aggressiveness that causes him to hit, and it is Leslie’s generosity that led to her big tip.Īlthough we can sometimes infer personality by observing behavior, this is not always the case. It seems natural and reasonable to make such inferences because we can assume (often, but not always, correctly) that behavior is caused by personality.

If Leslie leaves a big tip for the waitress, we might conclude that Leslie is generous. If Frank hits Joe, we might conclude that Frank is aggressive. We also use the techniques of person perception to help us learn about people and their traits by observing them and interpreting their behaviors.

In some cases, we may learn about a person indirectly, for instance, through the comments that other people make about that person. But how do we know what traits people have? People don’t walk around with labels saying “I am generous” or “I am aggressive” on their foreheads. We have seen that we use personality traits to help us understand and communicate about the people we know. Describe some of the factors that lead to inaccuracy in causal attribution.Compare and contrast the tendency to make person attributions for unusual events, the covariation principle, and Weiner’s model of success and failure.Review the fundamental principles of causal attribution.

Fundamental attribution error and actor observer bias