Fundamental error of attribution

The fundamental error of attribution consists in underestimating the situational causes with the profit of the dispositionnelles causes.

In 1967, Jones and Harris make listen on subjects of the speeches pro Castro and anti-Castro. The subjects must evaluate the real opinion of the speakers towards Castro. One says to the subjects either that the speakers speak freely, or, on the contrary, that they defend a point of view which was imposed to them randomly. When they believe that the speakers speak freely, the subjects estimate naturally that the speakers holding a pro-Castro speech are pro-Castro. But, if the subjects believe that the speakers are not free, they over-estimate the pro-Castro opinions of the speakers who hold of the pro-Castro speeches, and do not manage to hold account correctly owing to the fact that those play the comedy. The result of this experiment shows an error of judgment on behalf of the subjects due to the negligence of the situational constraints. The internal causes were over-estimated compared to the external causes.

It is Lee Ross which introduces the term of fundamental error of attribution , in 1977. In an experiment undertaken in collaboration with Amabile and Steinmetz, Ross shows in its turn the propensity of the individual to support the internal causes. In this experiment, a first subject, designated as questioner, questions another subject, indicated as questioned. The questions relate to the general culture and are written by the questioner according to his own competences and centers of interest. Observers must then evaluate the level of general culture of questioned and the questioner. Questioned cannot obviously always answer the various questions which the questioner chose. The experiment revealed that it is always the questioner who is considered more cultivated, whereas it did not have to answer the questions - and that it is not known if it knew the answers of them.

The fundamental error is explained a priori by:

  • a need for control (possibility of controlling the internal factors),

  • a need for social justice (responsibility for its own acts),
  • a need for comprehension and foreseeability (simplicity of the internal explanations).

Certain authors also speak about Biais of internality, consisting in systematically allotting to the individual the responsibility for his control.

The causes of this concept actually are very discussed. It oscillate between the error of cognitive treatment of information (Ross) and the preference for the internal causes, while passing by control (Jean-Leon Beauvois, 1976) or the illusion of control (Ellen J. Langer, 1975).

See too

References

External bonds

Random links:List military aircrafts of the years 1970 at the end of the XXe century | Crucero protegido | Place de la Nation | Cyrtodactylus ingeri | Kivijärvi | John Grey | 101_Dalmates_II_:_Aventure_de_Londres_de_la_pièce_rapportée