This paper critically examines attribution theory as presented across a selection of foundational readings in social psychology. Beginning with the historical origins of the theory in Heider's work on person perception, the paper surveys major theoretical frameworks including Jones and Davis's correspondent inference theory, Kelley's covariation model, and Weiner's achievement attribution model. It also explores the distinction between causes and reasons, the role of locus of control, and challenges in measuring dispositional versus situational attributions. The paper concludes by assessing the theory's ongoing relevance and limitations, particularly regarding falsifiability and its application to interpersonal communication and motivational processes.
Human beings are naturally an inquisitive species; they are always wondering how and why things occur. For this reason, they create sciences, philosophies, and religions as ways of answering their questions. For decades, this curiosity has influenced their personal, interpersonal, cultural, and societal lives in intricate ways. Much of this is observable in daily life through conversations and mindset interactions with other people. For example, human beings tend to question why some people look the way they do, why some people do not have jobs, or why other people travel overseas (Bains, 1983). The process of developing questions and answers about a series of events is fundamental in that it seeks to uncover the underlying causes of things that happen. Researchers have characterized this tendency as a justified basic human activity.
A range of theories has been advanced to shed light on how and why things happen as they do. This family of concepts, collectively known as attribution theory, seeks to explain and describe the communication and mental processes that form our everyday explanations. This paper critically discusses the issues in attribution theory covered in the readings and their related associations, and provides a critique of the usefulness of the theory in explaining processes in interpersonal communication (Buss, 1978).
The attribution concept argues that people are able to make sense of their surroundings based on what they consider to be the cause and effect of a given phenomenon. Attribution theory suggests that people observe their own experiences and behavior and then attempt to figure out what caused them. The causes they identify, in turn, shape how they approach the future. This review critically discusses the issues found in attribution theory as covered in the readings.
Charles Antaki, in his work on attribution and attributional theories, traces the history of attribution theory back to the study of person perception. In the 1950s, individual perception theorists were greatly concerned with what people think about one another, how they judge each other, and how people are influenced by their desires and needs. The formal birth of attribution theory came when theorists began directing more attention toward people's ascription of qualities and causes. Heider was responsible for this pivotal conceptual shift (Antaki, 1982).
Attribution theory is a core element of social psychology. Over the past several decades, numerous articles, handbooks, journals, and textbooks focusing on social psychology have been published in light of this theory. According to Bernard Weiner, the body of attribution research can be distinguished into general approaches toward social psychological phenomena. Forming attributions is essentially equivalent to giving explanations, primarily about behavior. Heider broke down ordinary explanations into two types: environmental causes and personal causes. In his analysis, people explain actions either by attributing the action to something about the person who performed it or by attributing it to an external cause (Antaki, 1982).
The readings present several key attribution theories, including the correspondent inference theory developed by Jones and Davis. According to these readings, this theory helps people understand the process of making internal attributions — that is, the tendency to view behavior as corresponding to an underlying motive or disposition. Dispositional internal attributions provide sufficient information from which to make predictions about someone's future behavior. According to Davis, the term "correspondent inference" applies specifically to occasions when an observer infers that someone's behavior corresponds with or reflects their personality. This represents an alternative framing of dispositional attribution (Weiner, 1980).
Kelley's covariation model is among the most well-known attribution frameworks. Kelley developed a logical model for judging whether a given action should be attributed to internal characteristics of a person or to external characteristics of the environment. According to him, three major types of causal information influence such judgments: consistency, consensus, and distinctiveness. People also look back on their experiences and consider two main types of causes: multiple necessary causes, such as high motivation to succeed, and multiple sufficient causes, which involve identifying sufficient reasons for certain actions.
Weiner's model explains achievement attributions — that is, a person's causal attributions relating to achievement behaviors, subsequent achievement motivation, feelings of shame or pride due to failure or success, future achievement expectancies, and persistence toward similar tasks (Buss, 1978).
"Weiner on effort, ability, and performance outcomes"
"Distinction between causes, reasons, and locus of control"
"Problems measuring dispositional and situational attributions"
"Theory's value, limitations, and future directions"
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.