Motivation and emotion/Book/2024/Attribution theory and emotion

Attribution theory and emotion:
How do attributions influence emotion?

Multimedia presentation (3 min)

Overview

Scenario Figure 1 Considering what to make of the behaviour/event. Susan comes into work with a scowl, stomping her feet as she makes her way to her desk. She doesn’t smile at anyone, and she keeps her head down. She roughly places her bag down and starts typing away loudly on her keyboard. Laura attributes Susan’s behaviour to being a personal grievance, and therefore is offended and feels hostile towards Susan for not smiling and happily greeting her. Mary on the other hand, attributes Susan’s behaviour to the fact that Susan might have had some difficult experiences recently. She wonders whether Susan is okay and doesn’t take it personally. Regardless of which attribution is correct, Mary and Laura are left feeling very differently from one another as a result of what they had attributed Susan’s behaviour to. Laura’s attribution style is considered hostile, where she attributes negative behaviours and outcomes to being outside of her control (not her fault), but in the control of another (Susan’s fault). Mary’s attribution style however is reasonable and considered, as she doesn’t attribute what is out of control to being her fault or to be a personal attack onto her. This attribution style is considered optimistic.

This chapter explores how attributions influence emotion. By exploring this, one can better understand those around them as well as themself, therefore improving their life and the way they interact with the world.

Attribution theory proposes that individuals make assumptions as to the causes of a behaviour or an event (Maymon et al., 2018). Based on the assumptions made, an individual will, in turn, have an emotional response (Graham, 2020). For this reason, it is particularly important to understand how attributions are made, as they have an impactful relationship on emotions. Emotions are a result of thoughts, feelings and behaviours (Emotions wiki page). These emotions influence one’s mood, their interactions with other individuals, and their subsequent thoughts, feelings and behaviours (Dasborough & Ashkanasy, 2002). Attributions result in emotions, yet emotions influence attributions (Cassese & Weber, 2011). As these two are so tightly intertwined, it is important to understand how and why.

The cycle of attribution flows from antecedents, to attributions, to consequences (Kelley & Michela, 1980). Antecedents are heavily influenced by emotions (Graham, 2020). It is said that beliefs and information are the antecedents, however these are both informed by one’s current emotions and frame of mind (Kelley & Michela, 1980). Next come the attributions. This takes the antecedents, and makes assumptions as to the perceived causes of the situation, behaviour, existence of or issue which one is currently facing (Weiner, 1995). This conclusion then leads to subsequent behaviours, perceptions, emotions and mindsets moving forward.

Focus questions: 1. What are the dimensions of attribution theory and what is the impact of these on emotions? 2. What attribution styles are there and how do these relate to emotional dispositions? 3. What unique circumstances exist that influence attributions and emotions?

Dimensions of attribution theory and their impact on emotions

The theory categorises these assumptions based on three dimensions: causality, control and stability (Graham, 2020). This helps to categorise factors at play when making assumptions, therefore giving insight into how one perceives and responds to causes of situations and individuals around them, based on the dimensions of these appraisals. This is especially helpful if an individual views something in a way where they believe it to be out of their control and that they cannot change it, where in reality, this might not be the case. Therefore it is important to assess and understand one’s own perceptions and the perceptions of those around them to understand the attributions they make and then the subsequent emotions that they experience.

Stability-Instability dimension

The stability-instability dimension refers to how stable a cause is in one’s life (Maymon et al., 2018). If a factor is stable (such as having a mental or physical disability, or even personality traits such as perfectionism and anger issues), this factor will remain in the long term and not likely to be removed/changed easily (Kelley & Michela, 1980). Instability (such as effort, the weather, feelings of hunger or tiredness and something out of stock at the supermarket), however, is thought to be easily changed, as within a much shorter window of time, the factor can be changed or rectified (Harvey & Martinko, 2009).

External-Internal dimension

The external-internal dimension is concerned with whether a cause can be attributed to oneself or an outside force (Maymon et al., 2018). If a factor is externally attributed, it is said to be the result of someone or something outside of the individual (Korn et al., 2016). Internally attributed factors are thought to be directly the result/cause of one’s own actions (Cassese & Weber, 2011).

Control-No control dimension

The control-no control dimension assesses whether the cause is a factor which is able to be controlled (Cassese & Weber, 2011). If individuals have control, this shows that they are able to change and direct the situation (Zhang et al., 2021). Alternatively, to have no control shows that the situation is out of the hands of the individual, that they do not have sway or influence over this factor (Harvey & Martinko, 2009).

How attribution styles relate to emotional dispositions

Attribution styles are considered to be the default, or natural styles that an individual use to assume causes of circumstances, results, actions and responses of the world and those around them (Harvey & Martinko, 2009). The idea of ‘default’ is particularly the case when the cause behind what someone is trying to identify is not particularly obvious. If the reason happens to be obvious, then our individual attribution styles are likely not to come into play under these circumstances. (Harvey & Martinko, 2009).Each style arguably has drawbacks, however some are considered to generally have more positive implications for the individual with that particular attribution style. There are three attribution styles commonly discussed. Optimistic, pessimistic, and hostile. Table 1 provides a brief summary of each.

Table 1

Attributions	Optimistic	Pessimistic	Hostile
Good/positive	Me	Chance	Me
Bad/negative	Chance	Me	Others
Temperament	Positive	Negative	Negative

Optimistic

Optimistic attribution style is considered to be the style with more positive implications for the individual themselves. It is characterised by the assumptions that if a good thing is to happen, whether situationally, or in direct response to one’s behaviours, that the perceived cause is the individual’s actions (Harvey & Martinko, 2009). If something positive happens, they attribute it directly to themselves. When a more negative or unpleasant outcome arises however, the individual attributes this to chance, or bad luck (Weiner, 1995). They do not believe that they had anything to do with that bad thing happening. This style has drawbacks that if a positive situation or response is not due to them, but to another, they might take credit for this. Additionally, if something negative occurs which they have directly caused and they are unable to accept or believe this, then it can cause issues. However these individuals are more prone to experiencing positive emotions.

Pessimistic

Pessimistic attribution style is considered to be worse for one’s mental health (Lee & Hall, 2020). Those with this attribution style, believe that if a good thing happens, that it is purely chance or luck (Weiner, 1995). This is harmful, as it means that no matter how hard they try, how much effort they put in or what steps they take, that they do not believe that result in positive outcomes. When it comes to negative outcomes however, they blame themselves. They believe that all negative things that happen are a direct result of their behaviours, actions and even just who they are as a person (Harvey & Martinko, 2009). This style results in individuals who often have low self esteem and commonly experience shame, guilt, and depression (Lee & Hall, 2020). This attribution style can also result in learned helplessness, as they do not think that they are in control of their life and believe themselves to be responsible for every negative outcome, and that nothing they can do will result in a positive outcome (Kelley & Michela, 1980). These individuals are more prone to experiencing negative emotions, predominantly aimed towards themselves.

Hostile

Hostile attribution style is similar to optimistic attribution style as they both attribute positive outcomes to be directly caused by themselves (Kelley & Michela, 1980). However, when it comes to negative outcomes, they do not perceive the cause to be chance or luck, and instead, blame others for the negative outcome (Harvey & Martinko, 2009). These individuals often display anger, and have more negative experiences, especially when compared to those with an optimistic attribution style. Sometimes, when these individuals blame others for negative events in their lives, this can lead to them reacting violently (Harvey & Martinko, 2009). This is caused by the individual believing that they are being put through something undesirable because of the other individual. That the negative outcome is the fault/responsibility of another person, and therefore they become angered at this perceived injustice that they are getting ‘punished’ as a direct result of another’s actions (Cassese & Weber, 2011).

Quiz

Choose the answers you feel best answer the question, and then when you are finished, click "Submit":

1 If Emily dropped her coffee and thinks ‘That’s bad luck’, what attribution style does she have?:

	Optimistic
	Pessimistic
	Hostile

2 If Dave applied for a job and was rejected, he thinks ‘I’m so stupid and worthless, I should have gotten a job when I was younger, now no one will hire me’, what attribution style does he have?:

	Optimistic
	Pessimistic
	Hostile

3 If Jamie slipped on some wet floor that had recently been wiped by the cleaner, they think ‘how dare someone leave the floor wet, now I have gotten hurt and its because of these lousy cleaners, ugh!’, what attribution style do they have?:

	Optimistic
	Pessimistic
	Hostile

Unique circumstances and their influence on attributions and emotions

Certain circumstances offset an individual’s default attribution style, and the way they would typically respond to those and the environments around them (Weiner, 1995). It is important to take these into account, and understand the reasons behind them as to be able to apply this in one’s own life. Many of these unique circumstances tend to follow a specific pattern of attribution, response, behaviour and emotion, when these particular dynamics and contexts occur.

Power imbalances

All situations involving one person in a position of power over another often lead the individual in the subordinate position to comply with the wants and needs of their superiors. This happens to be true when it comes to attributions and emotions as well. When an individual who is in power asks a less powerful individual to complete a task for them, or assist them in a task, the reasons with which the less powerful individual complies is external pressure (Dasborough & Ashkanasy, 2002). In this instance, the attributions are often that of ‘I have no choice but to help’, ‘They don’t care how I feel, they just want me to get this task done’, or that they may feel that they will suffer negative repercussions if they do not comply (Kelley & Michela, 1980). This results in the individuals with less power to begin to feel resentful, unhappy and anxious (among other negative emotions) towards their superior. This also carries forward into the future - the less powerful individual maintains this negative perspective towards the more powerful individual and this can be worsened with more requests (Dasborough & Ashkanasy, 2002).

Alternatively, when the more powerful individual assists or complies with the wants and needs of the individual with less power, this is done more of free will. This decision and subsequent actions are taken from an internal desire to help (Dasborough & Ashkanasy, 2002). The superior individual feels as though they have complete control and autonomy over their own actions and therefore they experience feelings of happiness. This happiness is also maintained into the future, maintaining a more positive perspective towards the subordinate.

This shows that when individuals perceive freedom of choice, and autonomy over their choices, words and actions - allowing one’s internal preferences to influence their decisions, that they experience more positive outcomes (Zhang et al., 2021). This attribution of ‘It is my choice’, ‘I want to do this’, and so on, makes individuals feel more empowered and lead to the experience of more positive emotions.

Antecedents and consequence

What occurs before an attribution is made, the antecedent, can also change one’s natural attributional and emotional response (Graham, 2020). This could include life stressors, an enjoyable morning coffee, a pleasant chat with a friend, a clumsy mishap or anything in between. It could be argued that one will always have antecedents and therefore do they really have a default style, however depending on the severity and impact of these antecedents, they can sway one’s natural response.

Now, let’s explore Susan’s morning to better understand her behaviours and emotions, taking into account the antecedents and attributions from earlier in her day. Susan woke up slightly later than usual, having gone to sleep late, as a result of needing to look after her mother who had recently undergone an operation. When she realised she was running late, she attributed this to being outside of her control, as she thought that this would not have occurred had she not needed to tend to her mother. This shows that her state is offset to being stressed and not in control of her life at this current moment in time. On her way to work, she had stopped off to grab some coffee, however the line was longer than usual. She attributed this to also be outside of her control, yet it made her more stressed as she feared she would be late for work. She did however blame herself for even trying to get coffee, when if she had just gone straight to work she would not have been late. Then, as she pulls up to work, she rushes in, spilling some of her coffee, and scrambles through the doors. She has now successfully gotten to work, yet she is stressed, partially blames herself for being late and going to grab coffee, but also blames her morning on unluckiness - while resenting the fact that even under so much stress and pressure, she is expected to get to work on time. Now, assessing this, had she not encountered even some of these antecedents, she would likely not have ended up in such a negative emotional state. She attributed her problems to being outside of her control, or at least at the fault of others. Understanding all of these factors, it is easy to see why Susan entered the office in an angry and frustrated manner.

As we can see, having insight into the antecedents of one’s behaviour and emotions can significantly enhance one’s ability to make correct attributions to another’s actions. Therefore, we can see that if stressful and challenging circumstances are deemed to be out of one’s control, they are more likely to experience negative emotions as a result of the attributions they make in these sorts of situations (Frese & Zapf, 1999).

In terms of consequences affecting attributions, individuals will often envisage an outcome before a situation has even played out or occurred (Weiner, 1995). This can cause emotional responses, triggering attributions in turn resulting in a further emotional response (Cassese & Weber (2011). This can often lead to negative emotions such as anger, frustration and guilt, which comes from the primary assessment of the causes (attributions) or an outcome or behaviour, even before this has occurred (Frese & Zapf, 1999). Alternatively, if one envisions a positive outcome and this does not come to pass, they will also react negatively. However, if one envisions positive outcomes, which in turn causes them to experience positive emotions and make optimistic attributions before they enter a situation, the outcome of these situations could in fact be better, as they approached it, believing it would be successful (Kelley & Michela)

Perceived choice of others

How one views others impacts the attributions they make about the behaviour of another. One key factor which comes into play here is perceived choice. If it is believed that one is knowingly, intentionally or absentmindedly making a choice that has a negative effect on another, the receiver of this negative outcome will become angered (Lee & Hall, 2020). If it is believed that this action by the other person could easily have not been taken, or that it could easily have been changed had they chose to change it, increases anger (Kelley & Michela, 1980). However, if individuals believe that it wasn’t the intent or carelessness of the choices of others, then they are not likely to feel angered or resentful (Harvey & Martinko, 2009).

Now, back to Susan’s situation. Susan is more stressed now that she is looking after her mother, yet she is not angry at her mother. She understands that her mother isn’t intentionally needing to be looked after, and doesn’t want to add problems to Susan’s life. Susan understands this and is therefore not angry. However, Susan is still acting out with anger, as she is more stressed than usual and therefore has a lower tolerance to struggles and negative situations.

Conclusion

The interaction between attribution theory, and the emotions one feel before and after these attributions, are very important for understanding the world around us. This can be said for how we interact with the world, and even how we interact with other individuals, whether that be colleagues, children or store managers. Attribution theory can examine why people come to the conclusions they reach about a situation, and therefore how they view it and react to it.

With regards to the Susan situation, it is important to understand that many things can be affecting one’s emotions and behaviours, and that without the full picture, it is easy to attribute her behaviour to something it is not. Attributions are assumptions and perceptions, and while they help us to make sense of the world around us, it is important to understand that our attributions sometimes need to be analysed, and not taken as fact. This is also helpful for one to understand. That everyone in the world is going through things unknown to others, and therefore it is often safe to assume that not everyone’s negative moods and emotions are a direct consequence of any one individual they are interacting with.

Focus Questions Answered 1. What are the dimensions of attribution theory and what is the impact of these on emotions? There are three dimensions, External-internal (whether the cause is oneself or others), Stability-instability (whether the cause is likely to change easily), and Control-no control (whether it is able to be directed or manipulated). The more an individual has agency over their own situation and behaviours, the more positively their emotions and experiences. Alternatively, if the opposite is true, then one will experience more negative emotions. 2. What are attribution styles are there and how do these relate to emotional dispositions? There are three attribution styles, optimistic (good because of me, bad because of chance), pessimistic (good because of chance, bad because of me), and hostile (good because of me, bad because of others). Those who have an optimistic attribution style generally disposed to experience positive emotions. However those with pessimistic and hostile attribution styles are disposed to more negative emotions - pessimistic leaning towards shame, guilt and depression, and hostile leaning towards anger and violence. 3. What unique circumstances exist that influence attributions and emotions? There are a few situations where unique circumstances exist, these are power imbalances, antecedents and consequences, and perception of the choice of others. Power imbalances often result in subordinates developing negative attitudes towards those with power over them, as they do not feel as though they can exercise free will - that they have to comply with the wishes of their superiors. Alternatively, it is the opposite for how those in power tend to view those with less power then themselves, as free will is the driving factor for complying. Antecedents include what has happened prior to an event. Emotions will be remaining from past experiences and these emotions will therefore influence attributions made thereafter. Consequence often includes imagining outcomes before they occur. This will result in an emotional response, and then the emotional response will influence one’s mood and their attributions going forward. With perceived choice of others, if it is believed that others could have avoided a decision which resulted in negative outcomes for another, then the individual receiving these negative outcomes will become angry. However, if this is not thought to be the case, than the individual will likely not become angry.

See also

• Attributions and emotion (Wikiversity)
• Emotion (Wikipedia)

References

Cassese, E., & Weber, C. (2011). Emotion, attribution, and attitudes toward crime. Journal of Integrated Social Sciences, 2(1), 63–97. https://www.jiss.org/documents/volume_2/issue_1/JISS_2011_Attitudes_Toward_Crime.pdf

Dasborough, M. T., & Ashkanasy, N. M. (2002). Emotion and attribution of intentionality in leader–member relationships. The Leadership Quarterly, 13(5), 615–634. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1048-9843(02)00147-9

Frese, M., & Zapf, D. (1999). On the importance of the objective environment in stress and attribution theory. Counterpoint to Perrewé and Zellars. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 20(5), 761–765. https://doi.org/10.1002/(sici)1099-1379(199909)20:5%3C761::aid-job951%3E3.0.co;2-y

Graham, S. (2020). An attributional theory of motivation. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 61(1), 101861. sciencedirect. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2020.101861

Harvey, P., & Martinko, M. J. (2009). Attribution Theory and Motivation. In Organizational behaviour, theory and design in health care (pp. 143–158). Jones and Bartlett Publishers. https://samples.jbpub.com/9780763763831/63831_08_CH07_final.pdf

Kelley, H. H., & Michela, J. L. (1980). Attribution Theory and research. Annual Review of Psychology, 31(1), 457–501. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ps.31.020180.002325

Lee, S. Y., & Hall, N. C. (2020). Understanding Procrastination in First-Year Undergraduates: An Application of Attribution Theory. Social Sciences, 9(8), 136. https://doi.org/10.3390/

Maymon, R., Hall, N. C., Goetz, T., Chiarella, A., & Rahimi, S. (2018). Technology, attributions, and emotions in post-secondary education: An application of Weiner’s attribution theory to academic computing problems. PLOS ONE, 13(3), e0193443. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0193443

Weiner, B. (1995). Attribution Theory: An Organizational Perspective (M. J. Martinko, Ed.; pp. 1–6). Taylor & Francis Group. https://api.pageplace.de/preview/DT0400.9781351465144_A37415537/preview-9781351465144_A37415537.pdf

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

• Attribution theory and motivation (pdf)
• Attribution theory: an organisational perspective (pdf)