Emotion and the Ultimate Attribution Error
The influence of specific emotions (fear and anger) on the ultimate attribution error was investigated. Participants were recruited from an undergraduate population. There were 420 participants (156 male) with a mean age of 19.26 years. Participants took part in an online study. The study identified participants’ political in-groups (Democrat or Republican), induced them to feel an emotion (fear, anger, or neutral), and asked them to make an attribution (dispositional or circumstantial control) for the good or bad behaviors of Democratic or Republican politicians. Results revealed an ultimate attribution error (participants made in-group favoring/out-group derogating attributions), and an influence of emotion over the pattern of attributions made within this attribution error. The hypothesis that the valence of emotions influences attributions within the ultimate attribution error was supported. No support was found for the hypothesis that appraisal dimensions of emotions influence attributions within the ultimate attribution error. Theoretical implications and future directions were discussed.
KeywordsAttribution Judgment Emotion
- Congressional Record (2011). http://www.gpoaccess.gov/crecord/index.html.
- Jones, E. E., & Nisbett, R. E. (1972). The actor and the observer: Divergent perceptions of the causes of behavior. In E. E. Jones, D. E. Kanouse, H. H. Kelley, R. E. Nisbett, S. Valins, & B. Weiner (Eds.), Attribution: Perceiving the causes of behavior (pp. 79–94). Morristown, NJ: General Learning Press.Google Scholar
- Levenson, R. (1994). Human emotion: A functional view. In P. Ekman & R. J. Davidson (Eds.), The nature of emotion (pp. 123–126). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- Oatley, K., & Johnson-Laird, P. N. (1996). The communicative theory of emotions: Empirical tests, mental models, and implications for social interaction. In L. L. Martin & A. Tesser (Eds.), Striving and feeling: Interactions among goals, affect, and self-regulation. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
- Rosenberg, S. W., & Wolfsfeld, G. (1977). International conflict and the problem of attribution. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 21, 75–103.Google Scholar
- Ross, L. (1977). The intuitive psychologist and his shortcomings: Distortions in the attribution process. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology, 10 (pp. 173–220). San Diego, CA: Academic.Google Scholar
- Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. (1979). An integrative theory of inter-group conflict. In W. G. Austin & S. Worchel (Eds.), The social psychology of intergroup relations. Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole.Google Scholar