Foundations of the Attribution Theory
Attribution theory suggests that people are rational and have a need to identify and understand the causal structure of their environment. The search for these attributes is the main characteristic of attribution theory. Attribution theory studies a person’s response as a result of the relationship of factors such as personal perception and interpersonal behavior. Piaget’s theory of cognitive development states that problems, mistakes, and various difficulties in a person’s life contribute to their development (Cognition, learning, and the Environment, 2017). However, a person tends to find excuses for himself and shift the blame to others, which is the basis of the attributive model.
Weiner’s Attributive Model and Causal Dimensions
For the first time, the doctrine of attribution was formulated by Weiner to explain motivation based on the reasons a person perceives and interprets their success in performing. He suggested that people use the following causal factors to explain their success or failure: effort, ability, the difficulty of the task, and help from others. They singled out three conceptions of causal factors: where the cause is located (inside the person or outside), stability, and controllability, which correlate differently with the above-mentioned causal factors and make people react differently to them.
In addition to the perceived reasons, the attributive model indicates a person’s expectations and the emotional reaction, which significantly impacts a person’s behavior and motivation (Semin & Smith, 2013). Although the roots of attribution theory can be found in the works of other founders of cognitive theory, F. Heider is usually recognized as its author. He is the founder of general cognitive psychology and the author of attribution theory.
According to the theory, all attributions fall into at least one of three causal dimensions: locus, stability, and manageability. As a result, the first person can locate the cause, regardless of the internal or external source (Fishman & Husman, 2017). The duration of a reason determines its stability, namely, whether it is continuous (stable) or temporary (unstable) (Fishman & Husman, 2017).
Controllability refers to the extent to which a cause can be changed intentionally (Fishman & Husman, 2017). If one or another causal dimension has a negative connotation, the student and, in general, any person may lose motivation, which can negatively affect their performance. This can lead to a loss of self-esteem and confidence in oneself and one’s abilities.
Attribution in Practice: A Personal Reflection
Heider argued that both ability and motivation are necessary for certain behaviors. For example, I once participated in a marathon, the result of which seemed to depend entirely on my mental abilities and creativity. However, I failed at the last stage, where total concentration was necessary. I blamed the organizers for failing to maintain complete silence outside the auditorium, which threw me off.
Looking back, I realize that, on the one hand, external noise is something that I could not control and could negatively affect my results, especially in a stressful situation. On the other hand, I understand that in this way, I try to calm myself and find a sufficient justification for my mistake. It allows me not to question my abilities and intelligence and thus maintain my self-esteem.
Now I try to handle failures more rationally, but not at the expense of my motivation and effectiveness. If it is essential for a person to blame some external factors for their failure in order not to lose stimulation, then this is possible. However, it should also be remembered that it is not always possible to throw responsibility on someone or something else; sometimes, this is an occasion for self-development.
References
Cognition, learning, and the environment. (2017). Bridgepoint Education, Inc.
Fishman, E. J., & Husman, J. (2017). Extending attribution theory: Considering students’ perceived control of the attribution process. Journal of Educational Psychology, 109(4), 559–573. Web.
Semin, G. R., & Smith, E. R. (2013). Socially situated cognition in perspective. Social Cognition, 31(2), 125–146. Web.