Abstract
Some pupils categorized as good vs. bad pupils were given a questionnaire of attributions, thus allowing the calculation of internality scores. They were also requested to answer as would a good (vs. a bad) pupil do. Finally, they also had to predict in which way a good (vs. a bad) pupil would answer on their behalf. The results were explained within the frame of two different theoretical fields: the theory of the norm of internality and the biases in terms of intergroup attributions. These results show that 1) the attribution of internal explanations relates to an attribution of value that takes place within the intergroup evaluation, 2) whereas the ultimate attribution error can clearly be observed among the good pupils, the bad pupils exhibit an attributive pattern that is favorable to the good pupils.
Résumé
Des élèves caractérisés sur la base de leur dossier comme “bons” ou “mauvais” passaient un questionnaire d’attributions permettant le calcul de scores d’internalité. Ils devaient également répondre comme le ferait un bon (ou un mauvais) élève. Ils devaient enfin prédire la façon dont un bon (ou un mauvais) élève répondrait à leur place. Les résultats ont été interprétés dans le cadre de deux champs théoriques différents: celui de la théorie de la norme d’internalité et celui des biais dans les attributions intergroupes. Les résultats montrent, 1) que l’attribution d’explications internes correspond à une attribution de valeur intervenant dans les évaluations intergroupes (norme d’internalité), 2) que si l’erreur ultime d’attribution est observée chez les bons élèves, les mauvais élèves exhibent un pattern attributif favorable aux bons élèves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Beauvois, J.-L. (1994).Traité de la Servitude Libérale. Analyse de la soumission. Paris: Dunod.
Beauvois, J.-L., & Dubois, N. (1988). The norm of internality in the explanation of psychological events.European Journal of Social Psychology, 18, 299–316.
Beauvois, J.-L., & Le Poultier, F. (1986). Norme d’internalité et pouvoir social en psychologie quotidienne.Psychologie Française, 31, 100–108.
Beauvois, J.-L., Bourjade, A., & Pansu, P. (1991). Norme d’internalité et évaluation professionnelle.Revue Internationale de Psychologie Sociale, 4, 9–28.
Bourhis, R.Y., Gagnon, A., & Moise, L.C. (1994). Discrimination et relations intergroupes. In R.Y. Bourhis & J.P. Leyens (Eds.),Stéréotypes, Discrimination et Relations intergroupes (pp. 161–200). Liège: Mardaga.
Codol, J.-P. (1975). On the so-called ‘superior conformity of the self’ behavior: Twenty experimental investigations.European Journal of Social Psychology, 5, 457–501.
Deaux, K., & Emswiller, T. (1974). Explanation of successful performance on sex-linked tasks. What is skill for male is luck for the female.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 20, 80–85.
Deschamps, J.C., & Beauvois, J.-L. (1994). Attributions intergroupes. In R.Y. Bourhis & J.P. Leyens (Eds),Stéréotypes, Discrimination et Relations intergroupes (pp. 97–126). Liège: Mardaga.
Deschamps, J.C., & Clémence, A. (1987).L’explication quotidienne. Perspectives psychosociologiques. Cousset: DelVal.
Dubois, N. (1991). Perception de la valeur sociale et norme d’internalité chez l’enfant.Psychologie Française, 36, 13–23.
Dubois, N. (1994).La norme d’internalité et le libéralisme. Grenoble: Presses Universitaires de Grenoble.
Dubois, N., & Le Poultier, F. (1991). Internalité et évaluation scolaire. In J.-L. Beauvois, R.-V. Joule, & J.-M. Monteil (Eds.),Perspectives cognitives et conduites sociales: Vol. 3. Quelles cognitions? Quelles conduites? (pp. 153–166). Cousset: DelVal.
Feather, N.T., & Simon, J.G. (1971). Attribution of responsibility and valence of outcome in relation to initial confidence and success and failure of self and other.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 18, 173–188.
Gilibert, D., & Pansu, P. (1994).Attribution de l’internalité dans un contexte intergroupe: Une stratégie de valorisation normative des groupes. Paper presented at the Junior Colloque, ADRIPS, Aix-en-Provence, France.
Greenberg, J., & Rosenfield, D. (1979). Whites’ ethnocentrism and their attributions for the behaviour of blacks: A motivational bias.Journal of Personality, 47, 643–657.
Guimond, S., & Simard, L.M. (1979).Perception et interprétation des inégalités économiques entre francophones et anglophones au Québec. Paper presented at the 40° congress of the “Société Canadienne de Psychologie”, Québec.
Hewstone, M. (1989).Causal Attribution. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
Hewstone, M. (1990). The “ultime attribution error”? A review of the literature on intergroup causal attribution.European Journal of Social Psychology. 20, 311–335.
Hewstone, M., & Ward, C. (1985). Ethnocentrism and causal attribution in Southeast Asia.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 48, 614–623.
Jellison, J.M., & Green, J. (1981). A self-presentation approach to the fundamental attribution error: The norm of internality.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 40, 643–649.
Jones, E.E. (1990).Interpersonal Perception. New York: Freeman.
Kenny, D.A., & DePaulo, B.M. (1993). Do people know others view them? An empirical and theoretical account.Psychological Bulletin, 114, 145–161.
Lorenzi-Cioldi, F., & Doise, W. (1994). In R.Y. Bourhis & J.P. Leyens (Eds.),Stéréotypes, Discrimination et Relations intergroupes (pp. 69–96). Liège: Mardaga.
Miller, D.T., & Ross, M. (1975). Self-serving bias in the attribution of causality: Fact or fiction?Psychological Bulletin.82, 213–225.
Monteil, J.M. (1993).Soi et le contexte. Paris: Colin.
Pettigrew, T.F. (1979). The ultime attribution error: Extending Allport’s cognitive analysis of prejudice.Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 5, 461–576.
Py, J., & Somat, A. (1991). Normativité, conformité et clairvoyance: leurs effets sur le jugement évaluatif dans un contexte scolaire. In J.-L. Beauvois, R-V. Joule, & J-M. Monteil (Eds.),Perspectives cognitives et conduites sociales: Vol. 3. Quelles cognitions? Quelles conduites? (pp. 167–193). Cousset: DelVal.
Sousa, E., & Leyens, J.P. (1987). A priori versus spontaneous models of attribution: The case of gender and achievement.British Journal of Social Psychology, 26, 281–292.
Tajfel, H. (1978).Differenciation between social groups: Studies in the social psychology of intergroup relations. London: Academic Press.
Tajfel, H. (1981).Human groups and social categories. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Tajfel, H., & Turner, J.C. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In W.G. Austin & S. Worchel (Eds.),The social psychology of integroup relations. Belmont: Wadsworth.
Tajfel, H., & Turner, J.C. (1986). The social identity theory of intergroup behavior. In S. Worchel & W. G. Austin (Eds.),Psychology of intergoup relations. Chicago: Nelson-Hall.
Tajfel, H., Flament, C., Billig, M., & Bundy, R.P. (1971). Social categorization and intergroup behavior.European Journal of Social Psychology, 1, 149–178.
Taylor, D.M., & Jaggi, V. (1974). Ethnocentrism and causal attribution in a South Indian context.Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 5, 162–171.
Weary, G. (1980). Examination and affect of egotism as mediators of bias in causal attribution.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 38, 348–357.
Zuckerman, M. (1979). Attribution of success and failure revisited, or: The motivational bias is alive and well in attribution theory.Journal of Personality, 47, 245–287.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Dubois, N., Beauvois, J.L. Internality, academic status and intergroup attributions. Eur J Psychol Educ 11, 329–341 (1996). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03172944
Received:
Revised:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03172944