Explanation of interpersonal events: on the significance of balance and causality

According to Brown and VanKleeck (1989), the perceived causes of interpersonal events are mediated by two kinds of factors: First, the interpersonal verbs used to describe these events carry implicit information with regard to the question of which one of the potential interaction partners has caused the event. Second, explanations of interpersonal events are governed by the principle of balance. For example, positive events are predominantly explained by positive causes, and negative events by negative causes. In addition, the interaction of the two mechanisms also has important consequences concerning the explanation of social events: (1) In balanced triads, an event is ascribed to the interaction partner who is seen as the causally dominant one (according to the implicit causality of the verb that is used to describe the interaction). (2) However, this pattern of data is reversed for unbalanced triads: here, the event is ascribed to the interaction partner who is seen as the causally less dominant one, according to the implicit causality of the verb. The present study addresses the question of whether this attributional shift can be explained in terms of corresponding changes in perceived covariation information. Results indicate that the perception of consensus and distinctiveness indeed correspond to the causal attributions as they are obtained for different kinds of triads. Thus, classical attribution variables are regarded as promising candidates in order to explain these attributional shifts for balanced versus unbalanced events.     

The dispositional inference strikes back: Situational focus and dispositional suppression in causal attribution.

The authors propose that correction of dispositional inferences involves the examination of situational constraints and the suppression of dispositional inferences. They hypothesized that suppression would result in dispositional rebound. In Study 1, participants saw a video of either a free or a forced speaker. Participants shown a forced speaker later made stronger dispositional inferences about a 2nd, free speaker than control participants did. Study 2 provided evidence for higher rebound among participants who reported trying harder to suppress dispositional inferences during the 1st video. In Study 3, participants were asked to focus on situational constraints or to avoid thinking about the speaker's characteristics. Only the latter instructions led to a dispositional rebound. These data support the view that the correction of dispositional inferences involves 2 processes that lead to distinct consequences in subsequent attribution work. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Culture and cause: American and Chinese attributions for social and physical events.

Argue that attribution patterns reflect implicit theories acquired from induction and socialization and hence differentially distributed across human cultures. In particular, the authors tested the hypothesis that dispositionalism in attribution for behavior reflects a theory of social behavior more widespread in individualist than collectivist cultures. Study 1 demonstrated that causal perceptions of social events but not physical events differed between American and Chinese students. Study 2 found English-language newspapers were more dispositional and Chinese-language newspapers were more situational in explanations of the same crimes. Study 3 found that Chinese survey respondents differed in weightings of personal dispositions and situational factors as causes of recent murders and in counterfactual judgments about how murders might have been averted by changed situations. Implications for issues in cognitive, social, and organizational psychology are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

"How automatic are social judgments?" Correction to Winter, Uleman, and Cunniff.

Reports an error in "How automatic are social judgments" by Laraine Winter, James S. Uleman and Cathryn Cunniff (Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1985[Oct], Vol 49[4], 904-917). There are errors in the labeling of the ordinates of the figures. The correct labeling is provided in the erratum. (The following abstract of the original article appeared in record 1986-03720-001.) Adapted the encoding-specificity paradigm developed by D. Thomson and E. Tulving (see record 1971-03487-001) to test 3 operational indicants of automatism (absence of intention, of interference from other mental activity, and of awareness). Recruited for a digit-recall study, 95 undergraduate students read sentences describing actions during the retention interval of either an easy or a difficult digit-recall task. Later, sentence recall was cued by (a) disposition cues, (b) strong semantic associates to the sentence actor, or (c) words representing the gist of the sentence, or (d) sentence recall was not cued. Awareness was measured immediately after the last sentence was read. Disposition-cued recall was higher than (b) or (d) and was unaffected by digit recall difficulty. Awareness of making dispositional inferences was only weakly correlated with disposition-cued recall. Results suggest that disposition inferences occurred at encoding, without intention, without interference by differential drain on processing capacity, and with little awareness. Thus, making dispositional inferences seems to be largely, but not entirely, automatic. (50 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Individuation, counting, and statistical inference: The role of frequency and whole-object representations in judgment under uncertainty.

Evolutionary approaches to judgment under uncertainty have led to new data showing that untutored subjects reliably produce judgments that conform to many principles of probability theory when (a) they are asked to compute a frequency instead of the probability of a single event and (b) the relevant information is expressed as frequencies. But are the frequency-computation systems implicated in these experiments better at operating over some kinds of input than others? Principles of object perception and principles of adaptive design led us to propose the individuation hypothesis: that these systems are designed to produce well-calibrated statistical inferences when they operate over representations of "whole" objects, events, and locations. In a series of experiments on Bayesian reasoning, we show that human performance can be systematically improved or degraded by varying whether a correct solution requires one to compute hit and false-alarm rates over "natural" units, such as whole objects, as opposed to inseparable aspects, views, and other parsings that violate evolved principles of object construal. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Implicit causality as implicit salience.

In past research, Ss attributed interpersonal actions more to agents than to patients and interpersonal experiences more to stimuli than to experiencers. For example, in the sentences "A cheats B" and "A shocks B," the act of cheating and the experience of shock were attributed more to A than to B. These and related findings are explained in terms of salience. In Study 1, people reading simple 3rd-person sentences judged agents to be more salient than patients and stimuli to be more salient than experiencers. In Study 2, the usual pattern of attributing actions primarily to agents and experiences primarily to stimuli was eliminated by manipulating sentence form so that the reader was depicted as actor rather than observer. In Study 3, sentences describing accidental collisions between inanimate entities implied greater salience and causality of agents than patients. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

The psychological causality implicit in verbs: A review.

The authors comprehensively review research and theory on the verb causality effect. The effect involves the finding that different types of verbs used to describe interpersonal events give rise to different assumptions about the causes of the respective event. The authors analyze and conceptualize the linguistic categories that serve as independent variables in the pertinent studies, describe the research methods used, conduct reanalyses on the published data, and summarize the results. They conclude that the verb causality effect constitutes a robust and strong finding that has been documented by several independent researchers across different verb samples, cultures, languages, and age groups. Furthermore, they present and discuss the theoretical explanations for the phenomenon and argue that it can be explained parsimoniously by basic attribution mechanisms (i.e., perceived covariation information). (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Developmental differences in the attribution of responsibility.

Investigated possible developmental differences in attributions of responsibility and causality for an interpersonal event. The procedure involved 240 male and female students from Grades 1, 3, 6, 8, and 65 college students watching videotaped scenes of a young female actress breaking a chair. Each S saw one scene from a set of 5 scenes, designed to represent F. Heider's (1958) levels of increasingly internal causation. After viewing the videotaped scene, each S was asked to make attributions of causality and "naughtiness" to the chair breaker. It was predicted that overall, Ss' attributions would show effects for Ss' grade, the level of the videotaped event, and the interaction of these 2 factors. These 3 effects were significant for the measure of causality, while for the measure of moral attribution, the 2 main effects were significant and the interaction approached significance (p?     

Attributional orientations and the prediction of behavior: The attribution–prediction bias.

Consistent with the proposal that people rely on implicit causal theories that relate different types of attributions to behaviors that differ in valence, 3 studies showed that in addition to predicting more positive than negative behavior in the target, participants produced an attribution–prediction bias. This bias indicated that persons with a dispositional orientation predicted more negative and less positive behavior from the target than persons with a situational orientation. The authors produced these findings in Studies 1 and 2 by manipulating the perceived characteristic motives of a target (dispositional, situational). In Study 3 the authors used a cultural operationalization of attributional orientations by examining the responses of Western students (dispositionalists) and East Asian students (situationalists). Finally, in support of the underlying mechanism, Study 4 showed that activating dispositional or situational knowledge facilitated the encoding of negative and positive behaviors, respectively. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

When dispositional and role power fit: Implications for self-expression and self–other congruence.

Integrating and extending the literatures on social power and person–environment fit, 4 studies tested the hypothesis that when people's dispositional beliefs about their capacity to influence others fit their assigned role power, they are more likely to engage in self-expression—that is, behave in line with their states and traits—thereby increasing their likelihood of being perceived by others in a manner congruent with their own self-judgments (i.e., self–other congruence). In Studies 1–3, dispositionally high- and low-power participants were randomly assigned to play a high- or low-power role in an interaction with a confederate. When participants' dispositional and role power fit (vs. conflicted), they reported greater self-expression (Study 1). Furthermore, under dispositional-role power fit conditions, the confederate's ratings of participants' emotional experiences (Study 2) and personality traits (Study 3) were more congruent with participants' self-reported emotions and traits. Study 4's results replicated Study 3's results using an implicit manipulation of power and outside observers' (rather than a confederate's) ratings of participants. Implications for research on power and person perception are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Suspicion of ulterior motivation and the correspondence bias.

Three studies examined the hypothesis that when perceivers learn of the existence of multiple, plausibly rival motives for an actor's behavior, they are less likely to fall prey to the correspondence bias than when they learn of the existence of situational factors that may have constrained the actor's behavior. In the 1st 2 studies, Ss who learned that an actor was instructed to behave as he did drew inferences that corresponded to his behavior. In contrast, Ss who were led to suspect that an actor's behavior may have been motivated by a desire to ingratiate (Study 1), or by a desire to avoid an unwanted job (Study 2), resisted the correspondence bias. The 3rd study demonstrated that these differences were not due to a general unwillingness on the part of suspicious perceivers to make dispositional inferences. The implications that these results have for understanding attribution theory are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Theories of Conditional Reasoning: A Developmental Examination of Competing Hypotheses.

Children and adolescents were presented with problems that contained deontic (i.e., if action p is taken, then precondition q must be met) or causal (i.e., if event p occurs, then event q will transpire) conditionals and that varied in the ease with which alternative antecedents could be activated. Results showed that inferences were linked to the availability of alternative antecedents and the generation of "disabling" conditions (claims that the conditionals were false under specific circumstances). Age-related developments were found only on problems involving indeterminate inferences. Correlations among inferences differed for children and adolescents. The findings provide stronger support for domain-general theories than for domain-specific theories of reasoning and suggest, under some conditions, age-related changes in the roles of implicit and explicit processing. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Trait attributions: Relative validity, covariation with behavior, and prospect of future interaction.

Data obtained from 39 undergraduates suggest that the prospect of future interaction and the type of information available about an actor exerted considerable influence on the trait attributions offered by Ss. Attributions were more extremely dispositional, more valid, and more strongly related to subsequent behavioral tendencies when future interaction was anticipated than when it was not. Ss offered more extreme trait attributions when they were provided with behavioral information about the actors that warranted a dispositional inference than when they were not provided with such information. However, even when Ss were not provided with information that warranted a dispositional attribution, they still offered more extreme trait inferences when future interaction was anticipated than when it was not. Findings are interpreted in terms of three explanations for why the naive psychologist offers attributions. (30 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Implicational schemata and the correspondence bias: On the diagnostic value of situationally constrained behavior.

Drawing on G. D. Reeder's (1993) schematic model of dispositional inference, it is hypothesized that perceivers' tendency to draw correspondent dispositional inferences from situationally constrained behavior (i.e., the correspondence bias) can be due to the application of schematic assumptions about trait-behavior relations (i.e., implicational schemata) within the process of situational adjustment. Applied to attitude attribution, situational adjustment is hypothesized to follow an implicit theory of ability, implying that only authors with a corresponding attitude are able to write a persuasive essay toward a given position. Results from 6 experiments offer converging evidence for this hypothesis. Implications for a sufficient understanding of the processes that lead to the correspondence bias are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Dialectics in attribution research: A reevaluation of the dispositional-situational causal dichotomy.

Investigated the contribution of dispositional and situational factors to the explanation of hypothetical situations. 54 undergraduates rated items describing different types of events (accidents, occurrences, coincidences) on 3 attributional scales (for dispositional, situational, and dispositional-and-situational causality) and then gave a written account of their judgments. Results show that each factor's contribution was a function of the type of event represented in each item. While there was agreement on the degree of contribution of a principal causal factor to the explanation of a hypothetical situation, an analysis of Ss' accounts with respect to dialectical thinking revealed individual differences in their overall attributional patterns. Ss did not perform consistently (either in a dialectical or nondialectical fashion) in their accounts from item-to-item and thus, dialectical thinking was not shown to be a consistent, individual trait. (44 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Held in contempt: The psychological, interpersonal, and performance consequences of contempt in a work context.

Guided by a social function of emotions perspective, the authors examined a model of the psychological, interpersonal, and performance consequences of contempt in a series of 3 experiments that tested the outcomes of being a recipient of contempt in the work domain. In these experiments, participants engaged in a business strategy simulation with a virtual partner—a computer programmed to give contemptuous and other types of feedback. In Study 1, which examined the task performance and interpersonal outcomes of contempt, recipients of contempt had significantly better task performance but also significantly more interpersonal aggressiveness toward their virtual partners compared with recipients of failure, angry, or neutral feedback. Study 2 examined 3 psychological outcomes mediating the contempt–task performance/aggression relationship: self-esteem, returned feelings of contempt, and activation levels. Lowered levels of implicit self-esteem and greater levels of activation significantly mediated the relationship between receiving contempt and task performance, whereas the contempt–aggression relationship was mediated by lowered implicit self-esteem and increased feelings of returned contempt. Study 3 examined status as a moderator of these relationships. Low-status recipients had significantly better task performance than did equal-status recipients, who performed significantly better than did the high-status recipients of contempt. In addition, low-status recipients displayed significantly lower levels of aggression in response to contempt than did equal-status and high-status recipients. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2011 APA, all rights reserved)