Using a random sample of 264 university students surveyed in 1976, two bipolar dimensions are explored in studying explanations for the sociopolitical system's present state. The results indicate that leader (versus mass) behavior, internally (versus externally) determined, is the primary attribution for systemic failure. Factor analytic results show that, of the 36 items used to measure attributions for systemic failure, those tapping mass-external control attributions emerge on the initial dimension. Furthermore these different attributional scales are found to be relatively unaffected by categoric-demographic factors. Finally, the mass-external control attributional dimension is found to correlate most with feelings of political alienation.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AggerR.GoldsteinM.PearlS.Political cynicism: Measurement and meaning. Journal of Politics, 1961, 23, 477–506.
2.
DevineD.The political culture of the United States: The influence of member values on regime maintenance. Boston: Little, Brown, 1972.
3.
FromanL.People and politics: An analysis of the American political system. Englewood Cliffs, N. J.: Prentice-Hall, 1962.
HeiderF.The psychology of interpersonal relations. New York: Wiley, 1958.
6.
JonesC.AronsonE.Attribution of fault to a rape victim as a function of respectability of the victim. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1973, 26, 415–419.
7.
JonesE.DavisK.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.
8.
JonesE.NisbettR.The actor and the observer: Divergent perceptions of the causes of behavior. Morristown, N. J.: General Learning Press, 1971.
9.
KelleyH.Attribution theory in social psychology. In LevineD. (Ed.), Nebraska symposium on motivation 1967. Lincoln, Neb.: Univer. of Nebraska, 1967. Pp. 192–238.
10.
LandyD.AronsonE.The influence of the character of the criminal and his victim on the decisions of simulated jurors. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 1969, 5, 141–152.
11.
LehnenR.American institutions, political opinion, and public policy. Hinsdale, Ill.: Dryden, 1976.
12.
LernerM.The unjust consequences of the need to believe in a just world. Paper presented at the meeting of the American Psychological Association, New York, 1966.
13.
LongS.Cognitive-perceptual factors in the political alienation process: A test of six models. Paper presented at the meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association, Chicago, 1976. (a)
14.
LongS.Political alienation among black and white adolescents: A test of the social deprivation and political reality models. American Politics Quarterly, 1976, 4, 267–304. (b)
15.
LongS.Political hopelessness: A new dimension of systemic disaffection. Journal of Social Psychology, in press.
16.
OlsenM.Two categories of political alienation. Social Forces, 1969, 47, 288–299.
17.
SearsD.Political behavior. In LindzeyG.AronsonE. (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology. (2nd ed.) Vol. 5. Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley, 1969. Pp. 414–458.
18.
ShaverK.Defensive attribution: Effects of severity and relevance on the responsibility assigned for an accident. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1970, 14, 101–113.
19.
ShaverK.An introduction to attribution processes. Cambridge, Mass.: Winthrop, 1975.
20.
ShawM.Some cultural differences in sanctioning behavior. Psychonomic Science, 1967, 8, 45–46.
21.
ShawM.SulzerJ.An empirical test of Heider's levels in attribution of responsibility. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1964, 69, 39–46.
22.
SulzerJ.Heider's ‘levels model’ of responsibility attribution. Williamsburg, Va.: Symposium on Attribution of Responsibility Research, 1971.
23.
SulzerJ.BurglassR.Responsibility attribution, empathy and punitiveness. Journal of Personality, 1968, 36, 272–282.
24.
WalsterE.The assignment of responsibility for an accident. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1966, 5, 508–516.
