80 subjects succeeded or failed on a continuing or completed task. Continuing subjects, who thought they might control future outcomes, biased their attribution toward controllable causes.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
JonesE. E., & DavisK. E.From acts to dispositions: the attribution process in person perception. In BerkowitzL. (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology. Vol. 2. New York: Academic Press, 1965. Pp. 219–266.
2.
KelleyH. H.Attribution theory in social psychology. Nebraska Symposium on Motivation, 1967, 7, 192–238.
3.
KelleyH. H.Attribution in social interaction. In JonesE. E.KanouseD. E.KelleyH. H.NisbettR. E.ValinsS., & WeinerB. (Eds.), Attribution: perceiving the causes of behavior. Morristown, NJ: General Learning Press, 1972. Pp. 1–26.
4.
KelleyH. H., & MichelaJ. L.Attribution theory and research. Annual Review of Psychology, 1980, 31, 457–501.
5.
TaylorS. E., & FiskeS. T.Salience, attention, and attributions: top of the head phenomena. In BerkowitzL. (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology. Vol. II. New York: Academic Press, 1978. Pp. 249–288.
6.
WeinerB.Achievement motivation and attribution theory. Morristown, NJ: General Learning Press, 1974.
