Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
External or "situational" attributions assign causality to an outside factor, such as the weather. Internal or "dispositional" attributions assign causality to factors within the person, such as ability or personality. Cognitive dissonance – was originally based on the concept of cognitive consistency, but is now more related to self-concept ...
Harold Kelley's covariation model (1967, 1971, 1972, 1973) [1] is an attribution theory in which people make causal inferences to explain why other people and ourselves behave in a certain way.
Several theories predict the fundamental attribution error, and thus both compete to explain it, and can be falsified if it does not occur. Some examples include: Just-world fallacy. The belief that people get what they deserve and deserve what they get, the concept of which was first theorized by Melvin J. Lerner in 1977. [11]
For example, consider someone who uses external attributions as a way not to use hearing aids. Examples of this are: A patient does not have the money to afford hearing aids, so they do not purchase them. A person believes using hearing aids would make them a burden to people they are around, so they do not wear them.
Locus of control as a theoretical construct derives from Julian B. Rotter's (1954) social learning theory of personality. It is an example of a problem-solving generalized expectancy, a broad strategy for addressing a wide range of situations.
As early researchers explored the way people make causal attributions, they also recognized that attributions do not necessarily reflect reality and can be colored by a person's own perspective. [6] [12] Certain conditions can prompt people to exhibit attribution bias, or draw inaccurate conclusions about the cause of a given behavior or outcome.
[37] The coding of the newspaper accounts showed that there was a "tendency to make internal attributions for success and external attributions for failure" which supports the self-serving bias as about 75% of the attributions from winning teams were internal while about 55% of attributions from losing teams were internal. [37]
The purpose of this theory is to explain why people make internal or external attributions. People compare their actions with alternative actions to evaluate the choices that they have made, and by looking at various factors they can decide if their behaviour was caused by an internal disposition.