From Dispositional Attributions to Behavior Motives The Folk-Conceptual Theory and Implications for Communication

2010 ◽  
Vol 34 (1) ◽  
pp. 63-91 ◽  
Author(s):  
Natalya N. Bazarova ◽  
Jeffrey T. Hancock
1999 ◽  
Vol 58 (4) ◽  
pp. 233-240 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anouk Rogier ◽  
Vincent Yzerbyt

Yzerbyt, Rogier and Fiske (1998) argued that perceivers confronted with a group high in entitativity (i.e., a group perceived as an entity, a tight-knit group) more readily call upon an underlying essence to explain people's behavior than perceivers confronted with an aggregate. Their study showed that group entitativity promoted dispositional attributions for the behavior of group members. Moreover, stereotypes emerged when people faced entitative groups. In this study, we replicate and extend these results by providing further evidence that the process of social attribution is responsible for the emergence of stereotypes. We use the attitude attribution paradigm ( Jones & Harris, 1967 ) and show that the correspondence bias is stronger for an entitative group target than for an aggregate. Besides, several dependent measures indicate that the target's group membership stands as a plausible causal factor to account for members' behavior, a process we call Social Attribution. Implications for current theories of stereotyping are discussed.


1979 ◽  
Vol 44 (2) ◽  
pp. 583-586 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cecilia H. Solano

Nisbett, et al., (1973) presented evidence that male actors use more situational than dispositional explanations for their own behavior and use more dispositional than situational attributions for their best friend. The present study replicated this finding for male actors ( n = 41), and demonstrates that female actors ( n = 41) produce the same pattern. A close examination of this data and Nisbett, et al.'s shows, however, that a different interpretation of the data is possible for a familiar other. Dispositional attributions are made equally to the self and to the best friend. Situational attributions are made primarily to the self.


1979 ◽  
Vol 42 (4) ◽  
pp. 405 ◽  
Author(s):  
C. Daniel Batson ◽  
A. Christine Harris ◽  
Kevin D. McCaul ◽  
Michael Davis ◽  
Timothy Schmidt

1981 ◽  
Vol 17 (1) ◽  
pp. 80-95 ◽  
Author(s):  
Frederick D Miller ◽  
Eliot R Smith ◽  
James Uleman

2003 ◽  
Vol 44 (1) ◽  
pp. 39-46 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kim Andre Sorum ◽  
Kjetil Marius Grape ◽  
David Silvera

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alice Dunning ◽  
Madeleine Pownall

Pre-Peer Review Version 1: In the current COVID-19 pandemic, there have been official health recommendations of social distancing, thorough handwashing, and self-isolation to prevent the spread of the virus. However, compliance with these recommendations has been mixed. We suggest that non-compliance may be justified by one’s (mis)perception of their own COVID-19 risk. In this paper, we explore the dispositional and situational attribution of self-reported COVID-19 risk, as per Heider’s Attribution Theory. We conducted a content and framework analysis of responses to an online survey, in which participants (N = 114) were asked to rate their likelihood of contracting the COVID-19 virus, before providing textual responses to explain their rating. Overall, we observed that generally, participants who rated their risk to be low made more dispositional attributions (i.e. attributing their risk to factors such as age and own personal hygiene) whereas higher risk participants made more situational attributions (i.e. attributing COVID-19 risk to government decision-making and other people’s cleanliness). A finalised framework of five response typologies including intrinsic, behavioural, balanced, contextual, and disengaged responses was systematically applied to the data. These results will be discussed in the context of attribution theory and risk perception, whilst providing future recommendations for research that tackles non-compliance of COVID-19 behaviours.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document