Motivation and emotion/Book/2023/Attributions and emotion
How do attributions affect emotion?
Overview
Everyday, people experience different emotions depending on what situations they are on. Emotion causes physiological and psychological changes that have an impact on thinking and doing. These emotions can be manifested behaviourally, consciously, and physiological arousal. A wide range of psychological aspects, such as personality traits, mood, and motivation, are connected to emotions. Attribution[1] is a term used in psychology which deals with how individuals perceive the causes of everyday experience, as being either external or internal. Models to explain this process are called Attribution theory.
In accordance with attributional theories of emotion, feelings of guilt assume that the root causes of a negative event exist within the individual, while feelings of anger assume that the causes of the triggering occurrence are located outside the individual (see Table 1). Attribution bias is a psychological phenomena that influences how people think about the origins of events and behaviours. There are several types of attribution bias, such as fundamental attribution error, false consensus effect, and hostile attribution bias.
Besides, attribution theory addresses with how everyday individuals understand the origins of behaviour and occurrences. Is someone sad because they are irritable or because something unpleasant has happened?
| Case study 1
Sam is a brilliant student, he studies very hard every semester at university. However, this last year his single mother got ill, and he had to take care of her and the house chores. He being studying but not with the same frequency as he used to; also, he feels very stressed and his marks are not the same as they used to be. What do you think this situation is attribute?
|
| Focus questions
What is the relationship between attribution and emotion? How do attributions affect emotions?
|
Types of attribution
One of the primary ways attributions could affect emotions is through the concept of locus of control. Weiner (1976) identifies three causal dimensions: locus of control, stability, and controllability, are used to categorise attributes. The internal versus the exterior locus of control are the two poles of the locus of control dimension. The stability dimension identifies whether causes alter over time. For instance, effort can be categorised as an unstable external cause and ability as an internal, stable cause (see Case study 1).
- Internal attribution, also know as dispositional attribution, designates an internal trait of an individual as the source of behaviour such as like ability and motivation or personality qualities, to explain other people's behaviour. The fundamental attribution error refers to this. For instance, Ascribing a person's actions to their character, motivations, or belief (see Table 1). Internal attributions give details from which we might extrapolate assumptions about a person's potential future behaviour (see Box 1).
- External attribution or situational attribution, is the process of attributing behaviour to a condition or event outside of a person's control rather than to an internal feature. Attempting to explain someone's behaviour, people frequently attribute it to other factors like environmental factors. Attributing success or failure to external factors like luck or circumstances can lead to emotions such as gratitude, frustration, anger or resentment towards those external sources.
| Controllable | Uncontrollable | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Stable | Unstable | Stable | Unstable | |
| Internal | Resignation | Guilt | Fear | Shame |
| External | Hatred | Anger | Self-pity | Surprise
Disappointment |
| Box 1. Research by Neumann (2000)
He put to the test the notion that attribution processes lead to feelings of resentment and guilt. Participants in the study had to attribute neutral acts to either themselves or to another individual using a procedural priming approach. Participants were exposed to a bad outcome that could have been brought on by them or by someone else after the priming technique. Following Weiner's methodology, past continuous use of internal attributions ought to reinforce emotions of guilt, whereas prior frequent use of external attributions should support feelings of wrath. |
Attribution theory of emotion
Weiner's attribution theory
The attribution theory of emotion put forth by Weiner serves as one of the transitional theories between the older undifferentiated arousal approaches and some of the more modern appraisal approaches that posit two or more separate differentiated states that are characteristic of emotions (Power & Dalgleish, 2007).
Weiner (1968) implies that a person's perception of past events and behaviours influences the actions they perform in the future since their previous experiences inspired them to do so. According to Weiner, the attribution theory is subjective, meaning that it is influenced by an individual's emotions and feelings. Humans have initial affective responses to the probable outcomes of the actor's intrinsic or extrinsic goals, which determine future behaviour. This implies that researchers are free to examine the feelings, prejudices, motives, and behaviours of their subjects rather than having to maintain objectivity throughout their investigations.
They constructed a theoretical framework that has grown to be a significant social psychology research paradigm. According to the theory of attribution, people attempt to explain why others behave in a certain way, or assign causes to behaviour. When trying to comprehend another person's actions, a person may assign one or several causes to that action. A person must first perceive or observe the behaviour, then they must believe that it was done on purpose, and finally they must decide whether they think the other person was coerced into performing the behaviour in which case the situation is attributed to as the cause) or not, in which case the other person is attributed as the cause) (Jones et al., 2003).
Kelley's covariation model
The attribution theory by Kelley's covariation model (1967) shows a logical framework for determining whether a specific action should be attributed to a personality trait (dispositional) or its surroundings (situational). Covariation refers to the ability to recognise the covariation of an observable effect and its causes when one gets information from several observations made at various points in time and under multiple circumstances. According to the approach, people should take into account the consensus, distinctiveness, and consistency of three different sorts of information when figuring out what caused a specific occurrence. These three elements make it easier to determine whether an incident was caused by internal or external influences.
Consensus
Consensus information is when referring to how other individuals react in a circumstance and how comparable their actions are; concerning whether the majority of individuals would respond similarly in that particular situation (Kelley 1967). When many people act in a same way, there is high consensus; when few do, there is low consensus. When numerous people display the same behaviour, or when there is strong unanimity, people are more likely to attribute the reason of the behaviour to outside forces (Rees et al., 2005). On the other hand, they are more inclined to ascribe the reason to internal variables when consensus is low (i.e., few others display the same behaviour). A session on team development might draw the majority of employees at a company (high consensus), and an outsider might attribute this to the programme's allure. For example, If Ella is singing in a play and everybody in the audience is laughing, the consensus is high. But if only Jim is laughing, the consensus is low.
Consistency
Consistency describes how consistently a person behaves in a particular scenario throughout time. For example, low consistency suggests that the behaviour is variable, whereas high consistency indicates that the behaviour is generally constant throughout time (Kelley, 1967). People are more prone to ascribe the cause to internal variables when they notice high levels of consistency (the behaviour is consistently the same). On the other hand, when there is little consistency (the behaviour changes), people tend to blame outside forces for the problem. An observer might attribute a coworker's promptness to their responsible personality (internal factor) if they are regularly on time for work each day (high consistency). However, if the coworker is inconsistently on time, the observer may blame the fluctuation to the coworker.
Distinctiveness
Distinctiveness information is a measure of the extent to which a behaviour is specific to one situation or is consistent across numerous situations. It entails determining if the behaviour is particular to the current scenario or more universal and present in a variety of contexts (Rees et al., 2005; Kelley, 1967). When a behaviour is special to a circumstance, it has high distinctiveness; when it is universal across situations, it has low distinctiveness. When distinctiveness is strong (unique to the circumstance), people are inclined to blame outside forces for the problem. When it's low (constant in all circumstances), they frequently blame internal reasons for the problem. An observer might explain a person's behaviour by pointing to the social context and outside circumstances, for illustration, when they become boisterous at a social gathering despite typically being quiet (high uniqueness). The observer might attribute the person's talkative behaviour to their outgoing nature (internal factor) if they are talkative in all social situations (low distinctiveness).
Attributional biases and error
False consensus effect
False consensus effect refers to participants' propensity to see one's own behavioural choices, beliefs and judgements as relatively common and appropriate to existing circumstances by others in a given population or social group (Ross et al.,1977). In other words, people tend to assume that their own views and actions are more common or widely accepted than they actually are. For example, imagine a person who is a strict vegetarian due to ethical reasons. This individual may assume that a significant majority of the people they encounter or know also share their views on vegetarianism and the ethical concerns related to consuming meat. Consequently, they might expect that when dining out with a group of friends, the majority of their friends will choose vegetarian options from the menu. However, in reality, only a few of their friends may share the same vegetarian beliefs, and the majority might prefer non-vegetarian options. Despite this, the person experiencing the false consensus effect would likely believe that their friends' preferences align more closely with their own than they actually do. This bias may lead to misunderstandings, miscommunications, and a distorted perception of the prevailing opinions and behaviours within a group or society. In essence, the false consensus effect can result in people assuming that their perspective is the norm and that others are more similar to them than they truly are, which can impact decision-making, interpersonal relationships, and the way individuals engage with their social environments.
Self-serving biases
Self- serving bias occurs as individuals attribute uncontrolled external forces for failures while attributing internal factors for successes (Shaver, 1970). For example, when someone get a good grade on an assignment, it can ascribe it to talent and intelligence. In other words, people often view themselves in a more favourable light by taking credit for their successes and avoiding blame for their failures. This bias is a common phenomenon in human cognition and has been extensively studied in psychology. While a poor grade could be attributed to an unreliable instructor or unjust grading. One explanation for this is because individuals desire to preserve their self-esteem. As an alternative, researchers have discovered that when the result is as expected, people are more prone to ascribe internal sources. The person is more prone to blame external influences when the result does not match the expected result. The defence of one's self-image is another hypothesis of self-serving bias.
Fundamental attribution error
Fundamental attribution error (FAE) describes a person's propensity to attribute another person's behaviour to their personality or character while attributing their own behaviour to outside, uncontrollable situational conditions. As an instance, Ben's coworkers have committed the fundamental attribution error if he have ever reprimanded as lazy for arriving late to an appointment before going on to justify own tardiness that same day. People's perceptions of the world are what lead to the fundamental attribution error. Everyone generally have some notion of their personality, goals, and external circumstances that influence their day-to-day activities, but rarely know everything that is happening with another person. Its influence on business and daily life can be diminished by adopting a number of steps, much as confirming and optimism biases.
Keeping in mind the previous example. people would be tempted to judge his character based solely on the fact that Ben was late to a crucial meeting. Nevertheless, it is likely that this behaviour is caused by a number of external causes rather than just one internal one. Ben could have been late because of a variety of unrelated environmental issues, such as an a family crisis or a traffic delay, which have nothing to do with his moral character. In practise, developing judgements about someone's character based on scant knowledge might have negative consequences. Gratitude is a technique that can be used to confront FAE. When it uses resentment against someone for a negative quality they exhibit, attempt to list five positive traits that person also possesses. This will broaden the vantage point and enable people to see someone as a full person rather than just through the prism of one flaw.
Another example found in case study 2. people have a propensity for stereotypically interpreting situations, which drives them to overemphasise the part that people's dispositions play in determining others' causes. This bias known as the fundamental attribution error, is described as a inclination for attributors to undervalue the effect of situational variables and to exaggerate the function of dispositional factors in regulating behaviour" (Ross, 1977; Wang & Hall, 2018).
How do attributions affect emotions?
The connection between attributions and emotions is a fundamental aspect of human psychology, shedding light on the intricate interplay between thoughts and feelings. This relationship is closely intertwined, as attributions can significantly influence an individual's emotional experiences and reactions. Some key aspects of this relationship are, Emotional Consequences of attributions, emotion regulation, interpersonal relationships and coping with success and failure. Attributions are a fundamental aspect of how individuals interpret events and behaviors in their lives. These attributions have a direct impact on the emotions they experience in response to these events. Understanding this relationship between attributions and emotions is crucial in fields such as psychology, as it provides insights into human cognition, motivation, and the ways people navigate their emotional experiences.
Implications
Data show that teachers' expressions of pity after student failure can harm students' motivation and performance by suggesting assessments of low ability, while teachers' expressions of rage instead subtly increase performance (Wang & Hall, 2018)Case study 2. A systematic review by Wang and Hall (2018) found that teachers perceive the causes of their students’ performance can affect teachers’ emotions that, in turn, predict their teaching behaviours . Their findings also demonstrate that teachers' perceptions of student accomplishment have an impact on their personal emotional experiences, in addition to the emotions that they publicly convey.
Quiz time
Applications
Attribution theory, developed by Heider (1958) and later expanded upon by other psychologists, explores how individuals explain the causes of events, behaviors, and outcomes. It has numerous applications across various domains. Attribution theory is extensively used in social psychology to understand how people attribute causes to the behavior of others; explaining social judgments and perceptions. For example, when people observe someone's behavior, they often make attributions about whether it is due to the person's personality traits (internal attribution) or the situation they are in (external attribution).
Weiner (1972) explained attribution theory plays a crucial role in educational settings as students often make attributions about their academic successes and failures. Teachers can use attribution theory to assist students develop a growth mindset by encouraging them to attribute their successes to effort and learning (internal attributions) rather than innate ability (external attributions); this can boost motivation and resilience in students (see case study 2. In clinical psychology, attribution theory is applied to understand how individuals with psychological disorders perceive and explain their symptoms. For example, someone with depression may attribute their low mood to internal, stable, and global causes (e.g., I'm a failure), which can contribute to the persistence of their depressive symptoms; therapists can use attribution theory to help clients reframe their attributions in a more adaptive way (Murray & Thomson, 2009) . In organizational behavior, attribution theory is relevant in the workplace to study how employees make attributions for their own and their colleagues' performance (Lord & Smith,1983). Managers can use this knowledge to improve employee motivation and performance by providing constructive feedback and acknowledging the role of effort and skill in achieving success (internal attributions). In sports, athletes often make attributions for their performance outcomes, understanding these attributions can be critical for coaches and sports psychologists in helping athletes cope with success and failure (Rees et al., 2005). For instance, attributing a loss to external factors (e.g., bad weather or referee decisions) may not be as beneficial as attributing it to aspects within their control (e.g., training and preparation).
Conclusion
The take-home message is that attributions play a crucial role in determining how individuals respond to adversity since attributions are not mere cognitive processes but powerful determinants of our emotional experiences. This chapter aimed to give readers the importance of attributions and bias they could affect emotional states; influencing persons' sense of control, responses to adversity, the intensity and duration of their emotions, and even the quality of their relationships. Recognizing the role of attributions in peoples' emotional lives may empower them to make more conscious choices about how they interpret events, ultimately influencing our emotional well-being and the way they navigate the complex tapestry of human emotions.
Finally, the relationship between attribution and emotion is multifaceted, and it can be influenced by various factors, including cultural norms, individual differences, and the specific context in which attributions are made. While research has provided valuable insights into this relationship, there is still much to explore and understand, particularly in the context of contemporary studies. Further research and ongoing critical reflection will continue to deepen our understanding of how attributions shape emotional experiences.
See also
- Aspects of emotion (Book chapter, 2018)
- Attribution (Wikiversity)
- Attributions and Motivation (Wikiversity)
- Achievement Motivation and attribution theory (Wikiversity)
- Emotional Self-regulation (Wikiversity)
- Emotional Competency
References
Kelley, H. H. (1967). Attribution theory in social psychology. In D. Levine (Ed.), Nebraska Symposium on Motivation, 15 , 192–238. University of Nebraska Press.
Jones, E. E., Kannouse, H. H. Kelley, R. E. Nisbett, S., Valins, & Weiner, B., (Eds), (1972). Attribution: Perceiving the Causes of Behavior. General Learning Press.
Langdridge, D., & Butt, T. (2004). The fundamental attribution error: A phenomenological critique. British Journal of Social Psychology, 43(3), 357–369. https://doi.org/10.1348/0144666042037962
Lord, R. G., & Smith, J. E. (1983). Theoretical, Information Processing, and Situational Factors Affecting Attribution Theory Models of Organizational Behavior. The Academy of Management Review, 8(1), 50–60. https://doi.org/10.2307/257167
Murray, J., & Thomson, M. E. (2009). An Application of Attribution Theory to Clinical Judgment. Europe’s Journal of Psychology, 5(3), 96–109. https://doi.org/10.5964/ejop.v5i3.257
Neumann, R. (2000). The Causal Influences of Attributions on Emotions: A Procedural Priming Approach. Psychological Science, 11 (3), 179–182. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9280.00238
Power, M. J., & Dalgleish, T. (2007). Cognition and emotion : from order to disorder (2nd ed.). Psychology Press.
Oatley, K., Keltner, D., & Jenkins, J. M. (2006). Understanding emotions. (2 ed.). Blackwell.
Reeve, J. (2018). Understanding motivation and emotion (7th ed.). Wiley
Rees,T., Ingledew, D. K., & Hardy, L. (2005). Attribution in sport psychology: Seeking congruence between theory, research and practice. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 6(2), 189–204. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychsport.2003.10.008
Ross, L., Greene, D., & House, P. (1977). The “false consensus effect”: An egocentric bias in social perception and attribution processes. Journal of experimental social psychology, 13(3), 279–301. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-1031(77)90049-X
Shaver, K. G. (1970). Defensive attribution: Effects of severity and relevance on the responsibility assigned for an accident. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 14(2),101–113. 10.1037/h0028777
Wang, H., & Hall, N. C. (2018). A Systematic Review of Teachers’ Causal Attributions: Prevalence, Correlates, and Consequences. Frontiers in Psychology, 9, 2305–2305. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02305
Weiner, B. (1972). Attribution Theory, achievement motivation, and the educational process. Review of educational research, 42(2), 203–215. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543042002203
Weiner, B. (1976). An Attributional approach for educational psychology. Review of Research in Education, 4(1), 179–209. https://doi.org/10.3102/0091732X004001179
Weiner, B. (1979). A theory of motivation for some classroom experiences. Journal of Educational Psychology, 71(1), 3–25. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.71.1.3
Weiner, B. (1986). An attributional theory of motivation and emotion. Springer-Verlag.
Weiner, B. (2019). Wither attribution theory? Journal of Organizational Behavior, 40(5), 603–604. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.2398
|
|
