Abstract
The aim of this paper is to provide an overview of the socionormative approach of internality in the field of education, and more specifically regarding scholastic judgment. It describes the theoretical development and the main procedures used by researchers to show that internal causal explanations have more value than external ones because they are normative and convey social value. We present results that show that the preference for internal explanations is learned in school. We also demonstrate that internal explanations are often chosen for self-presentation purposes and have some bearing in evaluative practices (here, scholastic judgment). We also present results which show that certain internal explanations of school events, regardless of their valence (success or failure), enhance the social worth of the pupil producing them. This applies to effort-based explanations which are more highly valued than others (e.g., in terms of personological traits such as aptitudes or abilities). Such results lead us to discuss the role played by internal explanations in the evaluation practices. We underline the relevant aspect of the socionormative theory of internality by comparison to another sociocognitive approach namely Weiner’s attributional theory of motivation.
Résumé
L’article fournit une vue d’ensemble de l’approche socionormative de l’internalité dans le champ éducatif, en particulier en matière de jugement scolaire. Il retrace le développement théorique et les principales procédures utilisées par les chercheurs pour montrer que les explications causales internes ont plus de valeur que d’autres, les externes, parce qu’elles sont normatives et porteuses de valeur sociale. Sont présentés des résultats empiriques qui montrent que la préférence pour l’internalité s’acquière à l’école, que les explications internes sont souvent choisies à des fins d’auto-présentation et qu’elles interviennent dans les pratiques d’évaluation (ici le jugement scolaire). Sont présentés également des résultats qui montrent que si l’émission d’une explication interne des événements scolaires, indépendamment de leur valence (résussites ou échecs), est toujours porteuse de valeur sociale pour l’élève qui l’émet, certaines de ces explications internes, comme celles qui en appellent à l’effort, sont plus valorisées que les autres (e.g., en termes de traits personnologiques comme les aptitudes ou les habiletés). De tels résultats nous conduisent à discuter le rôle joué par les explications internes dans les pratiques évaluatives et à souligner la pertinence de la théorie socionormative de l’internalité en regard d’une autre théorie sociocognitive, la théorie attributionnelle de la motivation de Weiner.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Anderson, C.A., Krull, D.S., & Weiner, B. (1996). Explanations: Processes and consequences. In E.T. Higgins & A.W. Kruglanski (Eds.),Social Psychology: Handbook of basics principles (pp. 271–296). New York: Guildford.
Beauvois, J.-L. (1984). La psychologie quotidienne. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.
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., Gilibert, D., Pansu, P., & Abdelaoui, S. (1998). Internality attribution and intergroup relations.European Journal of Social Psychology, 28, 123–140.
Bigot, J., Pichot, N., & Testé, B. (2004). Is there a drop in normative clearsightedness in sixth grade? Study of internality and normative clearsightedness in fourth to seventh graders.European Journal of Psychology of Education, 19, 335–347.
Bressoux, P., & Pansu, P. (1998). Norme d’internalité et activités évaluatives en milieu scolaire.Revue Française de Pédagogie, 122, 19–29.
Bressoux, P., & Pansu, P. (2001). Effet de contexte, valeur d’internalité et jugement scolaire.L’Orientation Scolaire et Professionnelle, 30, 353–371.
Bressoux, P., & Pansu, P. (2007). A methodological shortnote on measuring and assessing the effects of normative clearsightedness about internality.European Journal of Psychology of Education, 22, 169–178.
Carugati, F., & Matteucci, M.-C. (1999). La norma di internalita per spiegare comportamenti e eventi: Una ricerca nella scuola dell’obbligo.Psicologia dell’Educazione e della Formazione, 3, 317–333.
Channouf, A., Py, J., & Somat, A. (1999). Cognitive processing of causal explanations: a sociocognitive perspective.European Journal of Social Psychology, 29, 673–690.
Clémence, A., Aymard, C., & Roumagnac, P. (1996). A developmental study of school performance explanations of 6 to 11 year-olds: Causal differentiation and internality norm.European Journal of Psychology of Education, 11, 411–425.
Doise, W. (1986).Levels of explanation in social psychology. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Dompnier, B., & Pansu, P. (2007). L’intervention des explications en termes d’effort dans les stratégies d’autoprésentation et le jugement social: perspectives sociocognitives.Psychologie Française, 52, 459–478.
Dompnier, B., & Pansu, P. (submitted). La valeur sociale des explications causales en contexte éducatif: Autoprésentation des élèves et représentation des enseignants.
Dompnier, B., Pansu, P., & Bressoux, P. (2006). An integrative model of scholastic judgments: Pupil’s characteristics, class context, halo effect and internal attributions.European Journal of Psychology of Education, 21, 119–133.
Dompnier, B., Pansu, P., & Bressoux, P. (2007). Social utility, social desirability and scholastic judgments: Toward a personological model of academic evaluation.European Journal of Psychology of Education, 22, 335–352.
Dubois, N. (1986). Aspects normatifs versus cognitifs de l’évolution de l’enfant vers la norme d’internalite.Psychologie Française, 31, 109–114.
Dubois, N. (1988a). Acquisition de la norme d’internalité: Evolution des croyances internes dans l’explication des conduites et des renforcements.Psychologie Française, 33, 75–83.
Dubois, N. (1988b). The norm of internality: Social valorization of internal explanations of behavior and reinforcements in young people.Journal of Social Psychology, 128, 431–439.
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. (2000). Self-presentation strategies and social judgments — desirability and social utility of causal explanations.Swiss Journal of Psychology, 59, 170–182.
Dubois, N. (Ed.). (2003).A sociocognitive approach to social norms. London: Routledge.
Dubois, N., & Beauvois, J.-L. (1996). Internality, academic status and intergroup attributions.European Journal of Psychology of Education, 11, 329–341.
Dubois, N., & Beauvois, J.-L. (2008). The social value of internal explanations and the norm of internality.social and Personality Psychology Compass, 2, 1732–1752.
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, pp. 153–163). Cousset, Fribourg: DelVal.
Dubois, N., Loose, F., Matteucci, M.-C., & Selleri, P. (2003). Sociocognitive development: acquisition of the normativeness of internality. In N. Dubois (Ed.),A sociocognitive approach to social norms (pp. 94–122). London: Routledge.
Dweck, C.S. (1999).Self-theories. Philadelphia: Psychology Press.
Gilibert, D., & Cambon, L. (2003). Paradigms of the sociocognitive approach. In N. Dubois (Ed.),A sociocognitive approach to social norms (pp. 38–69). London: Routledge.
Heider, F. (1958).The psychology of interpersonal relations. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
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: W. H. Freeman and Company.
Jones, E.E., & Davis, K.E. (1965). From acts to dispositions: The attribution process in person perception. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.),Advances in experimental social psychology (vol. 2, pp. 219–266). New York: Academic Press.
Jouffre, S. (2003).L’expression et la clairvoyance de la norme d’internalité: Outils de mesure, production d’explications causales et niveau de scolarisation. Unpublished doctoral thesis, Université Paris 8, Paris.
Jouffre, S. (2007). Expression et clairvoyance des normes d’internalité et de consistance: Etude comparative entre élèves français et lituaniens.Revue Internationale de Psychologie Sociale, 20, 5–33.
Juvonen, J. (1996). Self-presentation tactics promoting teacher and peer approval: The function f excuses and other clever explanations. In J. Juvonen & K.R. Wentzel (Eds.),Social motivation: Understanding children’s school adjustement (pp. 43–65). Cambridge University Press: New York.
Juvonen, J. (2000). The social functions of attributional face-saving tactics among early adolescents.Educational Psychology Review, 12, 15–32.
Juvonen, J., & Murdock, T.B. (1993). How to promote social approval: Effect of audience and outcome on publicly communicated attributions.Journal of Educational Psychology, 85, 365–376.
Juvonen, J., & Murdock, T.B. (1995). Grade-level differences in the social value of effort: Implications for self-presentation tactics of early adolescents.Child Development, 66, 1694–1705.
Kelley, H.H. (1967). Attribution theory in social psychology. In D. Levine (Ed.),Nebraska Symposium on Motivation. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.
Lefcourt, H.M. (1976).Locus of control: Current trends in theory and research. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Levenson, H. (1972). Distinctions within the concept of internal-external control: Development of a new scale.Proceedings of the 80th Annual Convention of the American Psychological Association, 7, 261–262.
Luginbuhl, J.E.R., Crowe, D.H., & Kahan, J.P. (1975). Causal attributions for success and failure.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 31, 86–93.
Pansu, P. (1997a). The norm of internality in an organizational context. EuropeanJournal of Work & Organizational Psychology, 6, 37–58.
Pansu, P. (1997b). Norme d’internalité et appréciation de la valeur professionnelle: l’effet des explications internes dans l’appréciation du personnel.Le Travail Humain, 60, 205–222.
Pansu, P. (2006). The internality bias in social judgments: A socioconitive approach. In A. Columbus (Ed.),Advances in Psychology Research (vol. 40, pp. 75–110). Hauppauge, NY: Nova Science Publishers.
Pansu, P., & Gilibert, D. (2002). Effect of causal explanations on work-related judgments.Applied Psychology: An International Review, 51, 505–526.
Pansu, P., Bressoux, P., & Louche, C. (2003). Theory of the social norm of internality applied to education and organizations. In N. Dubois (Ed.),A sociocognitive approach to social norms (pp. 196–230). London: Routledge.
Phares, E.J. (1976).Locus of control in personality. Morrison: General Learning Press.
Ross, M., & Flechter, G.J.O. (1985). Attribution and social perception. In G. Lindsey & E. Aronson (Eds.),The handbook of social psychology, (pp. 73–122). New York: Random House.
Rotter, J.B. (1966). Generalized expectancies for internal versus external control of reinforcement.Psychological Monographs, 80, 1–28.
Rudolph, U., Roesch, S., Greitemeyer, T., & Weiner, B. (2004). A meta-analytic review of help-giving and aggression from an attributional perspective: Contributions to a general theory of motivation.Cognition & Emotion, 18, 815–848.
Stern, G.S., & Manifold, B. (1977). Internal locus of control as a value.Journal of Research in Personality 11, 237–242.
Struthers, C.W., Weiner, B., & Allred, K. (1998). Effects of causal attributions on personnel decisions: A social motivation perspective.Basic & Applied Social Psychology, 20, 155–166.
Weary, G., Jordan, J.S., & Hill, M.G. (1985). The attributional norm of internality and depressive sensitivity to social information.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 49, 1283–1293.
Weber, M. (1964).L’éthique protestante et l’esprit du capitalisme. Paris: Plon.
Weiner, B. (1979). A theory of motivation for some classroom experiences.Journal of Educational Psychology, 71, 3–25.
Weiner, B. (1985). An attributional theory of achievement motivation and emotion.Psychological Review, 92, 548–573.
Weiner, B. (1995).Judgments of responsibility: A foundation for a theory of social conduct. New York: Guilford Press.
Weiner, B. (2000). Intrapersonal and interpersonal theories of motivation from an attributional perspective.Educational Psychology Review, 12, 1–14.
Weiner, B. (2003). The classroom as a courtroom.Social Psychology of Education, 6, 61–90.
Weiner, B. (2005). Motivation from an attribution perspective and the social psychology of perceived competence. In A.J. Elliot & C.S. Dweck (Eds.),Handbook of Competence and Motivation (pp. 73–84). New York: Guilford.
Weiner, B., & Kukla, A. (1970). An attributional analysis of achievement motivation.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 15, 1–20.
Weiner, B., Frieze, I.H., Kukla, A., Reed, L., Rest, S., & Rosenbaum, R.M. (1972). Perceiving the causes of success and failure. 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. 95–120). Morristown, N. J.: General Learning Press.
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
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Pansu, P., Dubois, N. & Dompnier, B. Internality-norm theory in educational contexts. Eur J Psychol Educ 23, 385–397 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03172748
Received:
Revised:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03172748