Attribution
Attribution theory is the process of explaining the world around us. We may use
every day to explain things, such as the causes of certain behaviours or
outcomes. Knowing this theory and how it applies to aspects of our daily lives
can help you identify our own biases towards certain people and situations, and
those of other people. The Attribution Theory is concerned with how
individuals perceive the information they receive, interpret events, and how
these form causal judgements.
No individual would take an action or decision without attributing it to a cause
or factor.
Imagine that while driving to work one day you notice that the driver behind
you seems very aggressive: She is following your car very closely, honks her
horn if you delay even a few seconds when the red light turns green, and finally
swerves around to pass you. How will you make sense of, or attribute, this
behaviour? Attribution theory has been proposed to explain how individuals
judge people differently depending on what meaning we attribute to a given
behaviour.
Attribution theory is an approach used to explain how we judge people
differently, based on what meaning we attribute to a given behaviour.
Attribution theory emphasize people’s core social motive to understand each
other and to have some control. That is, people need to have some sense of
prediction about other people’s actions (understanding) and about their own
impact on those actions (control). Specifically, attribution theory suggests that,
when we observe an individual’s behaviour, we attempt to determine whether it
was internally or externally caused.
Internally caused behaviour is believed to be under the control of the individual.
Externally caused behaviour results from outside causes; that is, the person is
seen as having been forced into the behaviour by the situation.
For example, if an employee arrived late for work today, would we think it
was internally caused (e.g. as a result of sleeping late) or externally caused (e.g.
by a traffic jam)?
Attribution is considered to be a three-stage process. First, the behaviour of an
individual must be observed. Second, the perceiver must determine that the
behaviour they have observed is deliberate. That is, the person being observed is
believed to have behaved intentionally. Finally, the observer attributes the
observed behaviour to either internal or external causes. Internal causes are
attributed to the person being observed, while external causes are attributed to
outside factors. The two internal attributions one can make are that a person's
ability or a person's effort determined the outcome. Task difficulty and luck are
the external causes of behaviour. When perceiving behaviour, an observer will
make a judgment as to which of these factors is the cause of behaviour however,
when making a determination between internal and external causes of
behaviour, the perceiver must examine the elements of consistency,
distinctiveness, and consensus.
1. Distinctiveness,
2. Consensus, and
3. Consistency.
1. Distinctiveness
Distinctiveness refers to whether an individual displays a behaviour in many
situations or whether it is particular to one situation.
What we want to know is whether this behaviour is unusual. If it is, the observer
is likely to give the behaviour an external attribution. If this action is not unique,
it will probably be judged as internal.
Consequently, if the employee who arrived late to work today is also the person
that colleagues see as lazy, we are likely to judge the behaviour (resuming work
late) as internally caused.
2. Consensus
If everyone who is faced with a similar situation responds in the same way, we
can say the behaviour shows consensus.
Our tardy employee’s behaviour would meet this criterion if all employees who
took the same route to work today were also late.
If consensus is high, you would be expected to give an external attribution to
the employee’s tardiness, whereas if other employees who took the same route
made it to work on time, you would conclude the reason to be internal.
3. Consistency
Finally, a manager looks for consistency in an employee’s actions.
Does the individual engage in the behaviours regularly and consistently?
Does the employee respond the same way over time?
Coming in 10 minutes late for work is not perceived in the same way, if for one
employee, it represents an unusual case (she hasn’t been late for several
months), but for another it is part of a routine pattern (he is late for two or three
times a week).
The more consistent the behaviour, the more the observer is inclined to attribute
it to internal causes.
