This paper examines, from the perspective of “attribution theory,” the role of explanations (for drug use) in giving up drug use. In particular, the “functional utility” of explanations (attributions) in the service of self-esteem needs is discussed. It appears that, in a group of heroin users, explanations are consistently related to level or pattern of heroin use in a manner with considerable utility for self-esteem. The attributional strategies employed, and the implications of particular attributions (explanations) for drug use are also discussed.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BradleyG. W.1978Self-serving biases in the attribution process: A re-examination of the fact or fiction question. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 36:56–71.
2.
DaviesJ. B.1987Problems with Questions and Answers in Addiction Research. Invited guest editorial for British Journal of Addiction.
3.
DaviesJ. B.BakerR. in press The impact of self-presentation and interviewer bias effects on self-reported heroin use. British Journal of addiction.
4.
EiserJ. R. (ed.) 1982Addiction as attribution: Cognitive processes in giving up smoking. Social Psychology and Behavioural Medicine:281–299, John Wiley and Sons.
5.
EiserJ. R.SuttonS. R.WoberM.1978“Consonant” and “dissonant smokers and the self-attribution of addiction. Addictive Behaviours, 3:99–106.
6.
FarrR. M.AndersonT.1983Beyond Actor-Observer Differences in Perspective: Extension and Applications. In HenstoneM. (ed.), Attribution Theory: Social and functional Extension:45–46, Blackwell.
7.
FeatherN.SimonJ.1971Attribution of responsibility and valence of outcome in relation to initial confidence and success and failure of self and other. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 18:173–188.
8.
FriezeI.WeinerB.1971Cue utilization and attributional judgements for success and failure. Journal of Personality, 39:596–605.
9.
JonesE. E.NisbettR. E.1971The actor and the observer; Divergent perceptions of the causes of behaviour. Morristown, NJ; General Learning Press; Reprinted in JonesE. E. (eds.), Attribution; Perceiving the causes of behaviour. Morristown, NJ: General Learning Press.
10.
KelleyH. H.MichelaJ. L.1980Attribution theory and research. Annual Review of Psychology, 31:231–236.
11.
LernerM. J.MillerD. J.1978Just world research and the attribution process: Looking back and ahead. Psychological Bulletin, 81:1030–1051.
12.
MillerD. T.1976Ego-involvement and attributions for success and failure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 34:901–906.
13.
MillerD. T.1978What constitutes a self-serving attributional bias? A reply to Bradley. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 36:1221–1223.
14.
MillerD. T.RossM.1975Self-serving biases in the attribution of causality: Fact or fiction?Psychological Bulletin, 82:213–225.
15.
Van der PligtJ.EiserJ. R.1983Actors' and observers' attributions, self-serving bias and positivity bias. European Journal of Social Psychology, 13:95–104.
16.
WearyG.1980Examination of affect and egotism as mediators of bias in causal attributions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 38:348–357.
17.
ZuckermanM.1979Attribution of success and failure revisited, or: The motivational bias is alive and well in attribution theory. Journal of Personality, 47:245–287.
