Two scenario studies address the effects of the consequences of an actor's behavior as a function of behavioral causes (dispositional, situational) and behavior valence. In Experiment 1, the behaviors were likeability related. As predicted, inferences were more extreme when the behaviors produced consequences for others than when they did not affect others-but only when the behaviors were likeable. In Experiment 2, the behaviors were ability related. Only incompetent behaviors were judged more extremely when they affected others. A parallel pattern of findings emerged for the effects of causes. Judgments were more extreme for dispositional than for situationally caused behaviors but only when the behaviors were likeable or incompetent. Thus, inferences of likeable and incompetent behaviors were affected by causes and consequences, but dislikeable and competent behaviors were perceived as informative regardless of their causes and consequences.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Burger,J. M. (1981). Motivational biases in the attribution of responsibility for an accident A meta-analysis of the defensive-attribution hypothesis. Psychological Bulletin, 90, 496-512.
2.
Fiske, S. T. (1980). Attention and weight in person perception: The impact of negative and extreme behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 38, 889-906.
3.
Fiske, S. T. (1993). Controlling other people: The impact of power on stereotyping. American Psychologist48, 621-628.
4.
Gilbert, D. T. , & Malone, P. S. (1995). The correspondence bias. Psychological Bulletin, 117, 21-38.
5.
Irwin, M. , Tripodi, T. & Bieri, J. (1967). Affective stimulus valence and cognitive complexity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 5, 444-448.
6.
Jones, E. E. , & Davis, K. E. (1965). From acts to dispositions: The attribution process in person perception. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (vol. 2, pp. 220-266). New York: Academic Press.
7.
Jones, E. E. , Davis, K. E., & Gergen, K.J. (1961). Role playing variations and their informational value for person perception. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 63, 302-310.
8.
Jones, E. E. , & DeCharmes, R. (1957). Changes in social perception as a function of the personal relevance of the behavior. Sociometry, 20, 75-85.
9.
Kanouse, D. E. , & Hanson, L. R.(1972). Negativity in evaluations. In E. E. Jones, D. E. Kanouse, H. H. Kelley, R. E. Nisbett, S. Valins, & B. Weiner (Eds.), Attribution: Perceiving the causes of behavior (pp. 47-62). Morristown, NJ: General Learning.
10.
Konst, D. , Vonk, R, & Van der Vlist, R. (in press). Spontaneous inferences about causes and consequences of behaviors of leaders and subordinates. Journal of Organizational Behavior.
11.
Peeters, G. , & Czapinski, J. (1990). Positive-negative asymmetry in evaluations: The distinction between affective and informational negativity effects. In W. Stroebe & M. Hewstone (Eds.), European review of social psychology (Vol. 1, pp. 33-60). New York: John Wiley.
12.
Pratto, F., & John, O. P. (1991). Automatic vigilance: The attention-grabbing power of negative social information. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61, 380-391.
13.
Reeder, G. D. (1997). Dispositional inferences of ability: Content and process. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 33, 171-189.
14.
Reeder, G. D. , & Brewer, M. B. (1979). A schematic model of dispositional attribution in interpersonal perception. Psychological Review, 86, 61-79.
15.
Reeder, G. D. , & Spores, J. M. (1983). The attribution of morality. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 44, 736-745.
16.
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, 101-113.
17.
Skowronski, J.J. , & Carlston, D. E. (1987). Social judgment and social memory: The role of cue diagnosticity in negativity, positivity, and extremity biases. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 689-699.
18.
Vonk, R. (1993). The negativity effect in trait ratings and in open-ended descriptions of persons. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 19, 269-278.
19.
Vonk, R. (1994). Trait inferences, impression formation, and person memory: Strategies in processing inconsistent information about persons. In WV. Stroebe & M. Hewstone (Eds.), European review of social psychology (Vol. 5, pp. 111-149). New York: John Wiley.
20.
Vonk, R. (1995). Effects of inconsistent behaviors on person impressions: A multidimensional study. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 21, 674-685.
21.
Vonk, R. (1996). Negativity and potency effects in impression formation. European Journal of Social Psychology, 26, 851-865.
22.
Vonk, R. (in press). Differential meaning of behaviors enacted towards superiors and subordinates. European Journal of Social Psychology.
23.
Vonk, R. , & Konst, D. (in press). Intergroup bias and correspondence bias. British Journal of Social Psychology.
24.
Vonk, R, & Van Knippenberg, A. (1994). The sovereignty of negative inference: Suspicion of ulterior motives does not reduce the negativity effect. Social Cognition, 12, 169-186.
25.
Walster, E. (1966). Assignment of responsibility for a car accident. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 3, 73-79.
26.
Wojciszke, B. , Brycz, H., & Borkenau, P. (1993). Effects of information content and evaluative extremity on positivity and negativity biases. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 64, 327-335.
