He won’t notice a log in his own eye, but he will see a straw in someone else’s eye. This common expression can often be heard about someone in conversation. It perfectly characterizes the phenomenon of fundamental attribution error.
The central figure in this phenomenon is the person who makes this mistake. He strictly judges another for his mistake, while he himself makes exactly the same mistake. But, as often happens, he justifies himself by saying that he was a victim of circumstances, but, on the contrary, he blames his opponent.
For clarity, let’s imagine two colleagues, one of whom approaches the boss and asks to give him a day off tomorrow. The boss replies that he cannot let him go tomorrow, since his colleague asked for time off earlier. How will the employee respond to this? Of course, that he “has been asking for a long time and he has a good reason, and in general he didn’t take time off this year, not like this Ivanov”... It’s interesting that that same Ivanov in his place would have had very similar arguments.
The reason for everything is the fundamental attribution error, that is, our tendency to justify and whitewash ourselves, considering only external circumstances to be the cause of errors. At the same time, criticize others for the same shortcomings, considering them to be caused by laziness, inattention and other negative qualities.
This phenomenon was first described in 1968 by the classics of psychology Edward Jones and Victor Harris from Duke University. They conducted an experiment in which they asked participants to evaluate essays written about the activities of Fidel Castro. During the experiment, it turned out that personal antipathy towards the Cuban leader outweighs all reasonable arguments, and participants spoke negatively about all authors who justify Castro’s policies. Perhaps this happened because at that time it was Fidel Castro’s policies that were considered the reason for the breakdown in US-Cuban relations.
A striking example of a fundamental attribution error is found in Dmitry Glukhovsky’s popular work “Text”. The main character of the work, student Ilya Goryunov, condemns police lieutenant Pyotr Khazin for vacationing at resorts, living luxuriously and living beautifully with money earned by dishonest labor. According to the plot of the novel, Ilya had the chance to get his hands on the phone number of his now deceased abuser, and therefore access to all his connections and opportunities. Gradually, the student forgets how bad and dishonest it is to sell confiscated items for his own profit, and does the same, posing as a former offender. Of course, you can condemn the main character of the novel for not being true to his beliefs, but if you think about it, we have all made such a mistake at least once in our lives. After all, the emotional nature of a person is this: being involved in the eventual context of his life, he can no longer be impartial in assessing himself and his actions. So what should we do and how to avoid distortions of perception?
Knowing about the phenomenon of the fundamental attribution error, you can take a few simple steps before judging the actions of others (if you can’t avoid judging at all):
- Clarify the context of the situation in which the person finds himself: this will help you better understand the reasons for his behavior and delay your negative emotional reaction.
- Refuse to discuss with other people, or make personal accusations against the person.
- Remember similar situations in your life, choose the brightest one.
- Once again emotionally immersed in that period of life.
- Perhaps say words of support to the person you wanted to condemn, because now you understand him much better.
WELL
WELL
WELL
§ 1.4.3. Causal attribution errors
There are certain areas of research in which attribution processes play a critical role. One such area is Schechter's two-factor theory of emotion. According to Schechter, actual or merely simulated states of emotional arousal require cognitive interpretation in order to be perceived as specific emotions. Thus, male subjects in an experiment by Valins (1966) considered more attractive those images of young women that, when presented, simulated an accelerated or slowed heartbeat. The effect persisted even if imitation was reported before the final assessment (Cited in Heckhausen, T., p. 69). Thus, it is clear that cognitive explanations of reasons are part of the motivation process, having a decisive influence on our behavior. Just as we learn certain rules of behavior, we become familiar with certain cause-and-effect relationships, which we can later use without thinking. Kelly calls these connections culturally determined causal schemas. The principles of attribution presuppose a rational observer. But on the other hand, causal attributions are not always justified. Certain misstatements may occur. One such distortion arises from a tendency to simplify. Another bias involves something psychologists call the salience effect. This is the tendency to give more weight to those factors that are most noticeable and attract attention (for example, bad news). Then there is the attribution bias, which occurs so often and has such important consequences that it has been called the fundamental attribution error (L. Ross). When observing behavior and trying to understand what causes it, our judgments can be subject to two types of interrelated biases. If the reason for behavior is not obvious, then we tend to overestimate the role of dispositional factors and underestimate situational ones. American culture is characterized by the cult of the ego, in which special attention is paid to individual initiative and personal responsibility for successes and failures, sins and misdeeds. There is a tendency to see the person in the situation rather than the situation that makes the person that way. In fact, human behavior is much more influenced by situational variables than we realize. We overestimate our strength of character, write Philip Zimbardo and Michael Leippe in their book Social Influence. This is also confirmed by many experimental data and the phenomenon of transferring blame to the victim. It seems possible to use this pattern in psychotherapy. There is also an attribution error associated with the summation of arousal from various sources, when the result is attributed to the last source. For example, Zillman and Bryan's experiment on the influence of arousal on subjects' reactions to insults. The group of subjects who exercised before the offensive comments from the experimenter's assistant showed stronger expressions of anger in response to insults than the group that did relaxation. E. P. Ilyin also identifies such attribution errors as the error of false consent, when a person is based on his behavior in attributing reasons; fallacy of illusory correlations, which arises from the use of a priori information about causal relationships. Errors in illusory correlation can be associated with experience, profession, upbringing, and age. There are also individual differences in attribution style. Research has shown that some people are more prone to personal-psychological explanations, others to situational ones.
| Forward |
Description
The fundamental attribution error is a concept in psychology that denotes a characteristic attribution error, that is, a person’s tendency to explain the actions and behavior of other people by their personal characteristics, and their own behavior by external circumstances.
In other words, it is our tendency to judge other people differently than we judge ourselves.
For example, when a friend of ours gets a high position, we think that this is a favorable coincidence of circumstances, or that he was simply lucky - he was in the right place at the right time. When we ourselves are promoted, we are firmly convinced that this is the result of long, persistent and painstaking work, but not by chance.
To put it even more simply, the fundamental attribution error is expressed by the following reasoning: “I am angry because this is the way things are, but my neighbor is angry because he is an evil person.”
Let's look at another example. When our fellow student passed the exam brilliantly, we explain this by saying that “he didn’t sleep all night and crammed the material” or “he was just lucky with the exam card.” If we ourselves passed the exam with flying colors, then we are sure that this was due to good knowledge of the subject, and in general, high mental abilities.
Fundamental Attribution Error: Why You Make Bad Choices in Life
Author: Nir Eyal
One day I found myself in a crowded cinema hall. I had to wait two years for the sequel to this film, so I stocked up on popcorn and diet soda for three hours ahead. By the time the sweet lady burst into the hall, the first fifteen minutes had passed, the hero and the villain had just met face to face for the first time. Trying to squeeze into her seat, the girl awkwardly makes her way between the rows in front of me, blocking the best part of the film. “What a rude and unceremonious man!” - I think to myself, trying to see at least part of the screen.
A week later, I'm rushing to another movie that I planned to watch with friends. Rain, traffic jams. I hope to make it at least in time for the beginning of the introduction, but when I finally get to the cinema hall (through wet, it’s worth noting), the film has already started. I have to turn on the flashlight on my phone to find my seat and accidentally step on a few feet of seated spectators. You can hear dissatisfied snoring and loud sighs. It's clear what these people think about me.
“But it's not my fault! It was raining, the traffic jams were crazy!” - I think to myself as I sit down - “I’m usually never late.”
Again, a fundamental attribution error.
The “fundamental attribution error” is the bias we have when we judge people differently than we judge ourselves.
Fundamental Attribution Error: Why You Make Bad Life Choices
This cognitive bias takes several forms. The first occurs when things go wrong. In this case, we tend to believe that everything happened due to circumstances beyond our control. However, when others fail, we tend to think that it is the result of bad choices or that someone is a bad person.
For example, I believed that being late for a movie was due to the weather and I had no control over it. However, in the case of a late spectator, I did not allow this to happen. I assumed she was a rude person, even though I had no idea what could have caused her to be late.
Left: When someone screws up: Boo. You're an asshole! Right: When you screwed up: Well, it wasn't my fault... it was raining, there was traffic, the alarm went off too late, Apple suddenly updated my phone in the middle of the night...
The second type of fundamental attribution error occurs when everything is going well. When we achieve success, we tend to believe that it is a result of our talent and hard work. This may be true, however, when others succeed, our biases tend to make us think that person is lucky or has somehow gained privilege. A college friend helped him become a big shot in Hollywood, or maybe it was all down to a friend who in turn knew the CEO of a Fortune 500 company.
Left: I'm brilliant, thank you! Right: pfft... she was just lucky!
Why are our judgments the way they are?
Why do we tend to justify and exalt ourselves without doing the same for others?
First, it's hard to see things clearly when we don't have all the information. Our view is limited to the world around us. What we see is, as a rule, what we consider to be the cause of the problem. The overall picture is hidden from us. When it comes to our own mistakes, we are fully aware of factors beyond our control, so we understand the context of the problem.
On the other hand, attributing success to our uniqueness increases inner confidence, makes us feel good about ourselves, and improves our reputation among others.
It turns out that increasing trust can benefit us and even serve an evolutionary purpose. Researchers believe this could help us take more smart risks as we change our sense of what we're capable of.
For example, a study of early-career college graduates found that those who believe in their uniqueness are more likely to find jobs than graduates who tend to blame themselves for failure. Researchers believe that students who viewed things more selfishly were more motivated and optimistic about their future.
Stop making mistakes
While the fundamental attribution error has some benefits, it also comes with disadvantages when it comes to judging others. Awareness of this problem can help us solve it. There are two ways:
- Recognize the role of chance
Try to imagine how many things must have coincided to lead you to read this text. 13.8 billion years after the Big Bang, among billions of planets floating in the black abyss of space, among countless galaxies, through two million years of human evolution, one sperm fell into the egg that eventually became you. The chances of winning this cosmic lottery are amazingly slim. And most importantly, you had nothing to do with this.
You also live in the safest, healthiest, most educated, most equitable time in human history. Of course, things are far from perfect in the modern world, but for the average person, life is now much better than before.
Thinking about how many things had to happen outside of our control for us to become who we are can help us feel more grateful and remind us of how lucky we are.
- Develop empathy
Research shows that we are more likely to be susceptible to the fundamental attribution error when we make snap decisions about others. The next time you find yourself criticizing someone else's behavior, try viewing the situation with empathy.
Practicing empathy reduces the fundamental attribution error. Researchers believe that putting ourselves in the shoes of the “guilty” person makes us kinder and less judgmental.
For example, a person who did not let you pass on the road may be in a hurry to attend to truly urgent matters: his wife, say, is giving birth. Of course, you will never know what is really happening, but why not allow it to happen? Your anger will not change the situation and will only cause undue stress.
Before you make quick judgments, try to come up with an alternative story for why someone might behave a certain way. It doesn't matter if the story gets a little weird, you'll likely find a scenario you can imagine yourself in.
Just people
People seem to be quite prone to the fundamental attribution error. She helped our survival by maintaining our self-confidence. However, in modern society, this cognitive bias can harm us and others more than it can benefit us. This can cause us to lose self-control and end up in more trouble due to the consequences of our anger.
However, this bias is not irreversible. There are ways through which we can combat this problem and live a happier life. The next time you find yourself losing your patience, remember that there are people around you just like you. Put yourself in their shoes, even if it takes a little effort. After all, everyone will only get better from this.
Original: Nirandfar
Causal attribution and its errors
Causal attribution is a unique phenomenon in psychology that characterizes a person’s perception of the emotions, reasons and motives of a certain behavior of another person. If you do not have enough information about a person or the situation in which he is located, then a misinterpretation of what is happening arises. This phenomenon of perception, as a rule, is based on the attribution of some non-existent characteristics, features, and so on.
Attribution theory
Causal attribution was first studied in the mid-20th century by social psychologists Lee Ross and Fritz Heider. Subsequently, this phenomenon of relationships between people was reflected in the theory of attribution. Researchers tried to explain to ordinary citizens the logic of the development of certain events and their own behavior. Causal attribution in psychology explains how people interpret the behavior of other people and what follows from this. In an exact translation, this concept sounds like this: “causa” - “reason”, “atributio” - “endowment”, “giving”.
Causal attribution abilities
It is very important to understand that different individuals can behave similarly, but at the same time their actions can be guided by completely different motives. And sometimes individuals realize the same motives in completely different ways. This is due not only to different conditions, but also to different internal potential. Therefore, when analyzing a particular act of an individual, it is necessary to take into account the specifics of his needs, character traits, temperament, and so on. External situational reasons also matter. Of course, first of all you need to compare the active and reactive principles in the behavior of other people. After all, our relationships with other people are based on our expectations, and vice versa, relationships are formed on what we expect. To avoid the idea that an individual is initially hostile, you need to try to delve into his inner world and understand that, in principle, he is the same as us, and it is unlikely that he deliberately seeks to harm us.
The essence of causal attribution
Mental projection is the attribution of importance to any manifestations of the activity of another individual. Basically, such a causal attribution is based on a combination of a person’s appearance and the pattern of behavior that we have imposed on him.
Criteria for assessing individual behavior
Causal attribution requires criteria, which initially gives it the character of categorization and identification. After all, we know the behavioral traits of many people in a wide variety of situations and in combination with information about their individual personality characteristics. In general, causal attribution evaluates an individual's behavior by constructing a model of his inner world and based on the characteristics of his character. At the same time, what is visible is repeatedly correlated with what appears to us mentally.
Objectivity in assessing behavior
In order to avoid the error of causal attribution, it is necessary to be extremely objective, that is, to very significantly compare oneself in the place of another in moral terms. But in some cases this may make it difficult to determine the true motives of his behavior. For example, what we did intentionally, another person may do accidentally or out of ignorance. Therefore, one person can commit evil due to his hostility, and another - under the influence of emotions. Causal attribution theory was originally studied within the framework of social psychology. Now it is used in many areas of psychology: pedagogical, developmental, sports, etc.
