A study was conducted to assess the effects of instructional variations on subjects' responses to an attribution questionnaire. Results indicated that subjects who were told either that responses were a reflection of "social intelligence" or that their responses were important for the experimenter's doctoral research made more com plex and fewer personal attributions than subjects given standard instructions.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Heider, F.The psychology of interpersonal relations. New York: Wiley, 1958.
2.
Jones, E.E., & Davis, K.E.From acts to dispositions: The attribution process in person perception . In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology. Vol. 2. New York: Academic Press, 1965.
3.
Jones, E.E. & Nisbett, R.E.The actor and the observer: Divergent perceptions of the causes of behavior . Morristown, New Jersey: General Learning Press, 1971.
4.
Kelley, H.H.Attribution theory in social psychology. In D. Levine (Ed.), Nebraska Symposium on Motivation, 1967 . Lincoln, Nebraska: University of Nebraska Press, 1967, pp. 192-241.
5.
McArthur, L.A.The how and what of why: Some determinants and consequences of causal attributions . Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 1972, 22, 171-193.
6.
Miller, D.T. & Ross, M.Self-serving biases in the attribution of causality: Fact or fiction? PsychalogicalBulletin, 1975, 82, 213-225.
7.
Nisbet, R.E., Borgida, E., Crandall, R. & Reed, H.Popular induction: Information is not necessarily informative. In J. Carroll and J. Payne (Eds.), Cognition and social behavior, New York : Lawrence Erlbaum, 1977 .
