Causal attribution as a socio-psychological phenomenon. Causal attribution: what is this phenomenon and where is it applied

We often try to understand the reasons for the actions of others. At the same time, the assessment of behavior can be associated with both circumstances and personal characteristics. a specific person... This assessment is called "causal attribution." What is causal attribution theory is a question that requires detailed consideration.

What is causal attribution?

Experts in the field of psychiatry say that causal attribution is a separate phenomenon of interpersonal perception, which consists in interpreting, attributing the reasons for the actions of another person with a lack of information about the real reasons for his behavior. This term originated in the western social psychology and general idea was able to get in the attribution theory developed by the researchers.

Causal Attribution - Types and Errors

Causal attribution in psychology shows various patterns that lead to errors of perception. People can explain their own failures and the success of others using situational attribution. Often we all try to be more loyal and gentle to ourselves than to the people around us. Personal attribution is used to analyze one's own successes and the failures of others. An interesting fact can be called the fact that the reason for success is often associated with their own merits, and circumstances can be blamed for failures. This is the peculiarity of the human psyche.

Types of causal attribution

When talking about what causal attribution implies, it is important to keep the types in mind. Psychologists name three types of causal attribution:

1. Object causal attribution - a causal relationship is attributed to the object to which the action is directed.
2. Personal - attributed to the person who committed the act.
3. Circumstantial - attributed to circumstances

Causal attribution errors

Allocate typical mistakes causal attribution:

1. The tendency to overestimate the role of personality factors and the ability to underestimate the impact of a situation and circumstances. This error is typical for those who can be called observers. When assessing the behavior of another person, you can often see a certain pattern. So, in case of failures, they say that someone did not try very hard, or that people do not have enough abilities. When the result of the activity is successful, we can say that they were lucky. If it comes about self-attribution, the opposite trend can be observed, since its main goal is to maintain a positive one.
2. False consent error - it is common for a person to interpret his own behavior as typical, which is characteristic of many people.
3. The error of different possibilities of role behavior is different social roles may suggest different behaviors. For this reason, during attribution, the perceiver interprets the behavior of others according to their social roles.
4. Ignoring the informational meaning of what did not happen - the tendency to take into account extremely obvious facts.

Causal attribution and interpersonal attraction

In psychology, interpersonal attraction is understood as sympathy, affection, etc. Each of us not only perceives others, but also forms our own attitude towards them. Moreover, it will be individual for everyone. This attraction influences the very phenomenon of causal attribution. In other words, when the attitude towards a person is positive, then both the explanation of the reason for the actions and the behavior can be softer and more loyal. When a person is downright unsympathetic, the reasons for the person's actions can be mercilessly criticized.

Causal attribution in communication

To understand what causal attribution means, it is important to know when it occurs. It appears when unexpected obstacles arise in the path of joint activities - when difficulties and conflicts arise, clashes of interests and views. The moment all this is happening, people are applying causal attribution. In other words, we attribute the reasons for the behavior to other people and the more difficulties in interaction, the more seriously we approach the search for the cause.

An example of causal attribution would be being late for a meeting with friends. Some of the waiters are sure that this may be due to the weather, another believes that a friend is late due to frivolity, and the third even doubts whether the late was informed about the meeting place. So all friends different views about the reasons for being late: circumstances, features and, the reason is in itself.

In the process of interacting with each other, people have a need for mutual understanding. If the facts explaining the behavior of another person are not enough, then observers tend to attribute various motives... The same applies to the very subject of discussion: he also tries to find the reasons for his result. This phenomenon received the name of causal attribution - to ascribe reasons, not knowing for sure the content of what happened. He began to be studied in Western social psychology. Haider is considered to be the founder.

Casual attribution in psychology. Attribution examples

This phenomenon exists because everyone wants to see the whole picture, imagine all the events. But the problem is that the facts are not always known. And then the person begins to finish painting, thinking out the picture, bringing it to a logical conclusion. This process is carried out in accordance with the existing life experience... In psychology it has been noted diverse societal response to stereotypical and abnormal behaviors... Let's look at an example.

The students are expecting a new teacher who will teach them history. If asked to describe a history teacher, the class is likely to be boring and uninteresting. And if you introduce them to another teacher, having previously described his teaching style (he uses visual layouts, arranges scenes; does everything to make the lessons interesting), then the opinion about the personality will be non-standard, different from the widespread habitual judgment.

The fundamental error of causal attribution

This error lies in different points view, in other focuses. As a rule, there are two positions of observation: the participant himself and the observer from the side. Here, for the first, the figure of judgment is the circumstances, and for the second, the personality itself. So it happens advance viewing of what happened or is happening from different positions... This is the fundamental attribution error in psychology.

Types of causal attribution

Depending on the angle from which the situation is viewed, the resulting result appears. There are the following types:

1. Personal attribution. Attribution of the reasons for failure directly to the person;
2. Circumstantial. Blaming the prevailing circumstances;
3. Object. The reason is in the object itself.

It is interesting that the position of a person determines the direction of his thinking. The participant himself most often blames the circumstances. The observer sees the motive for failure in the personality (participant). This is due to the fact that neither one nor the other imagines a completely plausible picture. It turns out that attribution is a subjective, therefore, often erroneous opinion.

One more example. The shy guy finally decided to meet a girl. I thought it over in advance, even rehearsed my speech. In general, he also raised his self-esteem. He gets to know her on the street, and for some reason she refuses the occasion of acquaintance that has turned up. The guy immediately builds all kinds of hypotheses. He thinks: “maybe it’s me, maybe she’s not sympathetic to me; maybe she's just not in the mood, ”and so on. These thoughts can be either separately or come one after another.

In the same time correct understanding reasons for a person's actions is very important for maintaining relationships between people... Invented motives of behavior can be very different from real motives. But it so happens that sometimes a person cannot ask, clarify some points and therefore has to use his imagination.

Objectives and Results of Causal Attribution Research

The purpose of studies of mechanisms of causal attribution is to increase the effectiveness of interaction between people and the effectiveness of personal growth... The first assumes the most correct definition of the motives of certain actions. And the second shows the options for influencing motivation, activity, emotions, etc. What most fully helps to understand the study of this phenomenon is the indication of the moment of assignment or acceptance of responsibility for specific actions. And a comprehensive consideration of the current result. That is, the purpose of the research is finding precise definition actual motives of behavior.

It is known that a person treats himself more gently when assessing than other strangers. Someone's successes and their own failures are referred to as situational attribution. But when describing other people's failures and his own successes, he turns to personal attribution. In these cases, the person is inclined to consider either the prevailing circumstances or the personality itself, according to the final result, as the cause of what happened.

Usually a person explains success by his hard work, willpower, and his uniqueness. But failure is always associated with the situation. And if you analyze the actions of another person, then all of the above is applicable in reverse order... If a person has achieved success, this is how it happened. A if he fails, it is his own fault... And few think otherwise. Few will pay attention to the situation, focus on it. After all, if we explain the result of a person's activity in a different way, then this means recognizing it at our own level, or even better. This means comparing him to yourself.

Therefore, people tend to defend their self-worth in this way. It is easier to blame the circumstances, the object of the act, than to force oneself to work, to improve oneself. Causal attribution is applicable everywhere: in everyday life, at work, in relationships. And everywhere this principle of opposition operates.

Why do people need causal attribution

For various reasons, people tend to find an explanation for the reasons for actions.

Here is some of them:

1. Understanding what is happening around allows a person to avoid undesirable consequences;
2. Desire to feel safe;
3. Understanding what's going on is essential to making rational decisions.

Causal attribution is a unique phenomenon in psychology that characterizes a person's perception of emotions, causes and motives of a certain behavior of another person. If you do not have enough information about a person or about the situation in which he is, then there is a misinterpretation of what is happening. Such a phenomenon of perception, as a rule, is based on the attribution of some non-existent characteristics, features, and so on.

Attribution theory

Causal attribution was first explored in the mid-20th century by social psychologists Lee Ross and Fritz Haider. Later, this phenomenon of relationships between people was reflected in the theory of attribution. Researchers tried to explain to ordinary citizens the logic of the development of certain events and their own behavior... Causal attribution in psychology explains how people interpret the behavior of other people for themselves, and what follows from this. In an exact translation, this concept sounds like this: "causa" - "reason", "atributio" - "endowment", "giving."

Abilities for causal attribution

It is very important to understand that different individuals can behave in a similar way, but their actions can be directed by completely different motives. And sometimes individuals implement the same motives in completely different ways. This is due not only to the difference in conditions, but also to different internal potential. Therefore, when analyzing a particular act of an individual, it is necessary to take into account the specifics of his needs, peculiarities of character, temperament, and so on. External situational reasons also matter. Of course, first of all, you need to compare the active and reactive principles in the behavior of other people. After all, our relationships with other people are based on our expectations, and vice versa, relationships are formed on what we expect. In order not to have an opinion about the initial hostility of the individual, you need to try to delve into his inner world and understand that, in principle, he is the same as we are, and it is unlikely that he deliberately seeks to harm us.

The essence of causal attribution

Psychic projection is giving importance to any manifestation of activity of another individual. Basically, this causal attribution is based on the combination appearance of a person and a way of behavior imposed by us on him.

Criteria for assessing the behavior of an individual

Causal attribution requires criteria, which initially gives it the character of categorization and identification. After all, we know the behavioral traits of many people in the most diverse different situations and in combination with information about their individual personality traits. In general, causal attribution evaluates the behavior of an individual by building a model of his inner peace and based on the characteristics of his character. At the same time, what is visible is repeatedly correlated with what is presented to us mentally.

Objectivity in assessing behavior

In order to avoid the error of causal attribution, it is necessary to be extremely objective, that is, it is very significant to correlate oneself in the place of another in morally... But in some cases, this may make it difficult to determine true motives his behavior. For example, what we have done intentionally, another person can do it by accident or unknowingly. Consequently, one person can do evil because of his hostility, and another - under the influence of emotion. Causal attribution in theory was originally studied within the framework of social psychology. Now it is used in many areas of psychology: pedagogical, age, sports, etc.

Causal attribution refers to the desire of people to find an explanation for what is happening to them and around them. People need such explanations for various reasons.

• 1. When a person understands what is happening to him and around him, he is able to control what is happening and, as far as possible, avoid unpleasant consequences, unforeseen events both for himself and for people close to him.
• 2. A person in this case gets rid of the feeling of anxiety associated with a lack of understanding of what is happening.
• 3. Understanding what is happening allows a person to behave rationally in the current situation, to choose a rational way of acting.

For these reasons, a person seeks and finds for himself at least some explanation for what is happening. Even if this explanation ultimately turns out to be incorrect, it will nevertheless be able to allow a person to solve at least one of the above tasks, for example, temporarily calm down and be able to solve the problem and calm atmosphere on a reasonable basis.

One of the variants of the theory of causal attribution was proposed by the American scientist F. Filler. It argues that one person's perception of the behavior of other people largely depends on what that person sees as the reasons for the behavior of the people he perceives.

It is assumed that there are two main types of causal attribution: interval (internal) and external (external). Internal causal attribution is the attribution of the reasons for behavior to one's own psychological properties and characteristics of a person, and external causal attribution is the attribution of the causes of a person's behavior to external circumstances beyond his control. A person who is characterized by internal causal attribution, perceiving the behavior of other people, sees its reasons in their own psychology, and the one who is characterized by external causal attribution sees these reasons in environment... Combined, internal-external attribution is also possible.

Modern attribution theory is broader than causal attribution. It describes and explains all kinds of attributive processes, that is, the processes of attributing something to something or someone, for example, certain properties - to some object.

The general attributive theory proceeds from F. Haider's notion of attribution. This theory assumes the following order of events.

• 1. A person observes how someone else behaves in a particular social situation.
• 2. From the results of his observation, a person draws a conclusion about the individual goals and intentions of the person he is observing for basis perception and assessment of his actions.
• 3. A person ascribes to the observed certain psychological properties that explain the observed behavior.

Finding or explaining the reasons for certain events, people are guided by certain rules, make inferences according to them and often make mistakes.

F. Haider, author of another famous theory causal attribution (along with Fiedler), came to the conclusion that all kinds of explanations of people are divided into two options; explanations with an orientation to internal, psychological or subjective reasons; and explanations in which references to external, circumstances beyond the control of people prevail.

Another specialist in the theory and phenomenology of causal attribution, G. Kelly, identifies three main factors that influence the choice of a person's way of internal or external explanation of what is happening. This is the constancy of behavior, its dependence on the situation and the similarity of behavior. this person with the behavior of other people.

Constancy of behavior means the sequence of human actions in the same situation. The dependence of behavior on the situation includes the idea that in different situations people behave differently. The similarity of a person's behavior to that of other people suggests that the person whose behavior is being explained is behaving in the same way as other people.

The choice in favor of an internal or external explanation of behavior, according to Kelly, is made as follows:

• if a person concludes that a given individual in the same situation behaves in the same way, then this person attributes his behavior to the influence of the situation;
• if, as a result of observing the behavior of another individual, a person comes to the conclusion that in the same situation the behavior of the observed changes, then he explains this behavior by internal reasons;
• if the observer states that in different situations the person he is evaluating behaves differently, then he tends to conclude that the behavior of this person depends on the situation;
• if the observer sees that in different situations the behavior of the person he is observing remains the same, then this is the basis for the conclusion about the dependence of such behavior on the person himself;
• in the case when it is found that different people in the same situation they behave in the same way, a conclusion is made in favor of the predominant influence of the situation on behavior;
• if the observer discovers that different people in the same situation behave differently, then this serves as a basis for attributing such behavior individual characteristics of people.

It has been found that when explaining or evaluating the behavior of others, we tend to underestimate the impact of the situation and overestimate the impact personality traits person. This phenomenon is called the fundamental attribution error. This error does not always manifest itself, but only when the probability of attributing a cause to external or internal circumstances is approximately the same. Based on the Kelly concept described above, it can be stated that most often the fundamental error of attribution will manifest itself in conditions when the person explaining the behavior cannot accept a definite decision to what extent it is constant, whether it depends on the situation and whether it is similar to the behavior of other people.

In the causal explanation of one's own behavior and the behavior of other people, a person acts differently. In the same way, a person explains in different ways the behavior of those people that he likes or dislikes. It has its own laws, which, in particular, can be manifested in the following:

• if a person has done a good deed, then he is inclined to explain it by his own merits, and not by the influence of the situation;
• if perfect man the act is bad, then he, on the contrary, is more inclined to explain it by the influence of the situation, and not by his own shortcomings.

When a person has to give an explanation for the actions of other people, he usually acts as follows.

• 1. If a good deed was done by a person who is not sympathetic to this individual, such an act is explained by the influence of the situation, and not by the personal merits of the person who did it.
• 2. If a good deed was done by a person who is sympathetic to this individual, then he will be inclined to explain it by his own merits of the person who committed the act.
• 3. If a bad deed is committed by a person who is antipathetic to this individual, then it is explained by the personal shortcomings of the person who committed it.
• 4. If the bad deed is committed by a person who is sympathetic to the individual evaluating it, then in in this case the corresponding act is explained with references to the current situation, and not to the shortcomings of the person who committed it.

Another common error in causal attribution is that a person, explaining the reasons for something, seeks and finds them exactly where he was looking for them. This refers to the fact that if a person is tuned in a certain way, then this attitude will inevitably manifest itself in the way in which he will explain what is happening.

For example, if, observing a person's behavior, we are initially determined to justify him, then we will definitely find appropriate justifications; if we are determined to condemn the same behavior from the very beginning, then we will certainly condemn it.

This is manifested in a typical way, for example, in legal proceedings, which for a long time have been focused on the presence and exclusion of subjectivity in human judgments and assessments. The prosecutor, however, is always against the defendant. He accordingly seeks and finds arguments aimed at condemning him. The defense lawyer, on the contrary, is initially disposed in favor of the defendant, and accordingly he always seeks and finds compelling arguments in order to acquit the same defendant. WITH psychological point From the point of view, this practice is of interest because the above-described errors of causal attribution are clearly manifested in the attitudes and actions of the prosecutor and the defense attorney.

We encounter many people every day. We do not just pass by, but start thinking about them: what they say, how they look, we observe their behavior.

And often it seems to us that we do not just see how a person looks - whether he is fat or thin, tall or short, what color his eyes, hair, how he is dressed - but also such things as smart or stupid, solid or no.

We even subconsciously determine his mood, social status and we assume that we have already compiled a characterization of a person. However, it is not. All these actions of ours have their own names, and in psychology this phenomenon is called attribution.

Meaning

Let's figure it out: what is attribution? Attribution is a process when people, with a small amount of information, draw conclusions about the reasons for a person's behavior or events. But this does not always apply to other people. Most often, attribution is directed at oneself, when a person tries to justify or explain his actions, citing various factors.

The concept and essence of attribution is to take personal action. Those qualities of the individual that are characterized are excluded from the limits of perception - in fact, they even seem to be absent. That is, you can give another definition of attribution - this is the characteristic that they are trying to create through intuition and some inferences. And, as a rule, the attribution of certain qualities to one or another individual does not always turn out to be correct.

Causal attribution is aimed at explaining the motives of behavior, both one's own and that of others. It happens that you need to analyze and predict the behavior of a person, but there is not enough data for this. Therefore, the reasons and motives that could be guided by the object of attention are often thought out.

This approach is applicable to social groups when they are characterized, but there are no obvious motives for their behavior in the field of perception. Psychologists call this case group attribution. Group attribution also manifests itself when a group of individuals tries to explain their positive sides internal factors, and for the out-group, external factors are indicated as the reason. And vice versa, their negative moments are attributed to external factors, while in a foreign group they indicate internal factors as the cause of negative moments.

Attribution theory states that a person analyzes the behavior of other people depending on the reasons that he intuitively identified. According to the theory, causal attribution is classified into two types:

• External.
• Internal.

The external type of attribution is the search for the causes of behavior among factors that do not depend on a person, that is, external factors. And internal (internal) is an explanation of the causes of behavior, based on their own psychological state.

Attribution theory implies a certain order of human actions:

• Observing an object and its behavior in a particular situation.
• Draw a conclusion from the observation of the object on the basis of assessments and personal perception.
• Using this conclusion and the behavior of the object, to ascribe psychological patterns of behavior to it.

The concept and essence of attribution implies conjecturing the reasons for people's behavior, but this does not always correspond to reality. More specifically, more often than not, the theory of causal attribution is not true.

Varieties

Attribution in psychology is divided into three types. It is worth taking a closer look at the types of attribution.

• Personal attribution - means that a person is looking for the culprit of a particular situation. More often a specific person is the cause.
• Detailed - in this case, a person is not interested in specific culprits, he is looking for the reasons for what is happening in external factors.
• Incentive - the person blames inanimate object... More often this happens if he himself is to blame. For example: a glass broke because it was standing at the very edge of the table.

The causal attribution effect helped to reveal some facts. If an individual has to explain the luck of a stranger or his personal problems, then incentive attribution is used.

But if it becomes necessary to analyze the success of the individual himself and the failure of an outsider, then personal attribution is used. This indicates a peculiarity of the psychology of any person - we are much more loyal to ourselves than to others. Such examples of attribution are very clear evidence of this fact.

Also of interest is the fact that usually, when talking about success, a person indicates the main reason for himself. But in unsuccessful cases, circumstances are always to blame. The individual believes that he achieved everything because he is very smart and hardworking, and if there was any failure, then the reason for this was factors beyond the control of the individual.

However, if a person talks about the success of another person, then everything is opposite. Another was lucky because he is a sucker, a sneak, that he is on a short leg with his superiors. And he has no luck, because he is lazy and not smart enough.

Social causal attribution is very evident in organizational leaders when they need to characterize subordinates. There are long-standing prejudices at work, and they are often formulaic. If the management is asked to tell about the reason for the ineffective result, then the causal factor will always be internal. Always and everywhere ordinary workers will be to blame for the decline in production.

And few will point out that the reason for the decline in production was insufficient funding or improper organization of labor. In such cases, there is a tendency to underestimate the situational factors and greatly overestimate the capabilities of the individual.

It can also be noted that managers often do not take responsibility for any failures. When asked why they are so ineffective in their place, they cite low financial support as the reason, but not their own oversight. However, when it comes to success, the management, as a rule, completely ascribes this achievement to itself.

Erroneous judgment

In judging, a person is very often mistaken. This is due to the fact that he usually underestimates external factors, the influence of the situation, but overestimates the personal capabilities of another individual.

Such a case has been called a fundamental attribution error. This happens when the reasons are the same for both internal and external factors. The individual cannot make up his mind about the decision, and a fundamental mistake occurs.

By indicating the effects and causes, we draw different conclusions. Also, our conclusions and explanations of the reasons will be different depending on whether we like the other person or not.

• If an individual has come to success, then he will indicate his own qualities as the reason.
• It will be the situation that is to blame for the failure of the individual.

The phenomenon of causal attribution can be traced in the analysis of the behavior of a nice person and not so much. A person makes a significant mistake when he finds reasons where he was looking for them. This means that if a person has already tuned in to definite result, then he will find it everywhere. If we intend to justify a person's actions, then we will always find reasons to justify him.

And vice versa, if we decide to condemn someone, then we will definitely condemn, finding the appropriate reason. At the same time, the attribution of responsibility will only be in people with a developed feeling. They tend to imagine themselves in the place of others, understand the feelings of strangers and try on other people's patterns of behavior.

Attribution is speculation when analyzing someone's actions when there is a lack of information. In other words, we want to get data about our colleagues, interlocutors or just about a group of people based on some of the data that we have. If this data is not enough, then there is such psychological phenomenon like attribution. It can both reflect reality and distort it. This is very important to consider.