Motivation and emotion/Book/2023/Attributions and emotion

Overview edit

Case study 1

Figure 1. Sam cooks at home since his mother is ill. His low marks could be attributed to the lack of time for studying.

Sam is a brilliant student, but last month his single mother got ill, so he had to take care of her and the house chores. As a result, he has not been studying with the same frequency as he used to. He is feeling very stressed as his marks keep decreasing. What do you think this situation is attribute to?

Well, Sam feels worried and sad about his mother [Explain how this scenario illustrates the relationship between attributions and emotion]

Everyday, people experience different emotions depending on what situations they are in. Emotions cause physiological and psychological changes that have an impact on thinking and doing. These emotions can be manifested behaviourally, consciously, and physiologically 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 that deals with how individuals perceive the causes of everyday experience, as being either external or internal. The models to explain this process are based on 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 how people understand the origins of behaviours and occurring events. Is someone sad because they are irritable or something unpleasant has happened?

Focus questions

What is the relationship between attribution and emotion?
How do attributions affect emotions?

Types of attribution edit

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 known as dispositional attribution, designates an internal trait of an individual as the source of a behaviour such as ability 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 people might extrapolate assumptions about a person's potential future behaviour (Neumann, 2000).
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. People frequently attribute their behaviour 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 (Kim et al., 2006).

Table 1. Probable emotions associated with different types of attributions for "failure" (Oatley et al., 2006)
	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 edit

Attribution theory explains why a person experiences a particular emotion in a particular way, with people trying to pinpoint the circumstances that brought about a particular emotional episode (Weiner, 1985). Owing to the fact that a single causal event can evoke multiple feelings, and that a single emotion can be linked to multiple causes, attribution theory is a better fit for explaining the causes of emotions than appraisal theory. This is due to the fact that, whereas attribution theory also considers other people's feelings when determining causality, appraisal theory focuses primarily on an individual's own feelings (Zhang et al., 2021).

Weiner's attribution theory edit

The Attribution theory of emotion 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. This 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 person's intrinsic or extrinsic goals, which determine future behaviour (Weiner, 1968). 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. 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 edit

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 obtains 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 (Power & Dalgleish, 2007).

Consensus edit

Consensus information refers to how other individuals react in a circumstance and how comparable their actions are; concerning whether the majority of individuals would respond similarly in a 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 program'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 edit

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.[factual?]

Distinctiveness edit

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 distinctiveness is strong (unique to the circumstance), people are inclined to blame outside forces for the problem. When it is 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).[factual?]

The effects of attribution and emotion edit

According to Reeve (2018), attributions are significant since the justification we offer elicits feelings in us. When good things happen, people usually feel happy, and when bad things happen, people usually feel sad or upset. Wiener (1985) describes the initial evaluation of the outcome as the outcome-dependent emotional reaction. Furthermore, attribution theory postulated that people provide additional justifications for their successes or failures in addition to these basic outcome-generated emotional reactions (see Table 2). New emotions emerge to distinguish the initial happy-sad emotional reaction from a particular secondary feeling after the event has been revealed. The emotions' attributional roots are:

Table 2. Seven emotions occur as a function of the attributional information-processing flow (Wiener, 1985, 1986; Reeve, 2018)
Emotion	Description	Example
Pride	Attributing a positive outcome to an internal cause	"I succeeded because of my outstanding effort"
Gratitude	Attributing a positive outcome to an external cause	"I succeeded because of help from my teammates"
Hope	Attributing a positive outcome to a stable cause	"I do well in sports because I am athletic by nature"
Anger	Attributing a negative outcome to an external-controllable cause	"I lost because my opponent cheated"
Pity (Sympathy)	Attributing a negative outcome to an external-uncontrollable cause	"I lost my job because of the poor economy"
Guilt	Attributing a negative outcome to an internal-controllable cause	"I lost because I did not put forth much effort"
Shame	Attributing a negative outcome to an internal-uncontrollable cause	"I was rejected because I am ugly"

Learned helplessness edit

It is a psychological phenomenon when people think they have no control over their circumstances and that their efforts will not affect the course of events. People's tendency to assign causes to their events is typically the root cause of this powerless sensation. Individuals often attribute unfavourable experiences to internal, stable, and external sources when they are experiencing learned helplessness.. For example, if someone repeatedly fails in relationships (negative event), they might attribute it to their own unworthiness (internal), believe that they are inherently unlovable (stable), and apply this belief to all areas of their life (global), leading to a sense of helplessness and resignation.

Learned optimism edit

Learned optimism is the idea that individuals could be trained to adopt more optimistic explanatory styles, which can lead to better mental and emotional well-being. Optimistic individuals tend to make external, temporary, and specific attributions for negative events. They attribute negative outcomes to external factors, see setbacks as temporary, and apply the negativity to specific situations rather than their entire lives (Seligman, 2006).

Key points

- Learned helplessness is closely related to attributions, particularly the attribution theory of emotion.

- The link between learned optimism and learned helplessness lies in the ability to change one's attributions and explanatory styles.

Attributional biases and error edit

Attributional biases are cognitive tendencies that influence how individuals explain the causes of events or behaviours. Situations under which people display the common bias of believing that some unchanging trait, disposition, or attitude of an individual caused the behaviour are the subject of extensive research and literature. As phenomena that need to be explained, researchers have recently highlighted the necessity for attribution theorists to investigate the attributed causes of behaviour (Kenworthy & Miller 2002).

False consensus effect edit

The 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.

Self-serving biases edit

Self-serving bias occurs when people attribute uncontrolled external forces for failures while attributing internal factors for successes (Shaver, 1970). Due to this bias, 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 (Ross, 1977). While a poor grade could be attributed to an unreliable instructor or an unfair grade. One explanation for this is because individuals desire to preserve their self-esteem.

Fundamental attribution error edit

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.

Another example found in Wang and Hall (2018) people have a propensity for stereotypically interpreting situations, which drives them to overemphasise the part that people's dispositions play in determining others' causes as described an inclination for attributors to undervalue the effect of situational variables and to exaggerate the function of dispositional factors in regulating behaviour (Ross, 1977).

How do attributions affect emotions? edit

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 edit

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). 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 edit

Applications edit

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 to 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 edit

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 explained 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. Recognising 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 (Rees et al., 2005; Reeve, 2018).

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 could explore how attributions of emotions impact romantic relationships, friendships, and family dynamics in order to contribute to our understanding of the role of attributions in social interactions.

References edit

Heider, F. (1958). The psychology of interpersonal relations. Wiley.

Kelley, H. H. (1967). Attribution theory in social psychology. In D. Levine (Ed.), Nebraska Symposium on Motivation, 15 , 192–238. University of Nebraska Press.

Kenworthy, J., & Miller, N. (2002). Attributional biases about the origins of Attitudes: externality, Emotionality, and rationality. "Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82" (5), 693–707. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.82.5.693

Kim, P., Dirks, K. T., Cooper, C. D., & Ferrin, D. L. (2006). When more blame is better than less: The implications of internal vs. external attributions for the repair of trust after a competence- vs. integrity-based trust violation. "Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 99" (1), 49–65. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2005.07.002

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

Seligman, M. E. (2006). "Learned optimism". Knopf.

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. (1985). An attributional theory of achievement motivation and emotion. "Psychological Review, 92" (4), 548–573. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.92.4.548

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

Zhang, Y., Prayag, G., & Song, H. (2021). Attribution theory and negative emotions in tourism experiences. Tourism Management Perspectives, 40, 100904–. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tmp.2021.100904

External links edit

↑ "Attribution (psychology)". Wikipedia. 2023-09-26. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Attribution_(psychology)&oldid=1177263467.

[1] "Attribution (psychology)". Wikipedia. 2023-09-26. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Attribution_(psychology)&oldid=1177263467.

[1]