Question

Faulty Attributions

Included in our many decision-making errors is the way in which we explain actions and events around us. Based on our observations, we tend to make decisions about whether another person's actions are internally or externally caused. One model of attributional processes suggests that when we are familiar with a person, we rely on three judgments to make this decision: consistency of the person's action, distinctiveness of that action, and consensus of that action with actions of others. Unfortunately, we tend to be more strict with how we judge others' actions than how we judge our own — thus, the decision-making error!

The following scenario walks you through a particular work meeting where one coworker, Michael, behaves badly. Relying on these three judgments—consistency, distinctiveness, and consensu —determine if you should make an internal or external attribution regarding Michael’s behavior.

In this exercise, please read the mini-case below and answer the questions that follow.

Yesterday, you and your project team met with your supervisors to detail the progress you've made over the past 6 months. It was a big meeting because the company is financially strapped and trying to find ways to cut costs. You and the other members of your team were a bit stressed, as no one wants this project (and possibly, their jobs!) to be cut. About an hour into the meeting, one of the top management team members started turning on the heat and criticizing some of the decisions your team has made on this project. Two members of the team explained that Michael was responsible for the questionable decisions. The two members criticized Michael's participation and qualifications. This went on for some time before Michael lost his temper, yelled at the team, and stormed out of the meeting.

a) Mostly, you feel empathy for Michael - you don't think you would have been able to keep quiet in the meeting either. This suggests a (high consensus of his behavior, high distinctiveness of his behavior, high consistency in his behavior).

b) Michael tendsd to be relatively calm with, not just his coworkers, but also family and firneds, so this outburst was unusual. This suggests that, in this situation, there is (high consistency in his behavior, high distinctiveness of his behavior, high consensus of his behavior).

c) You've seen Michael in "tough spots" in meetings before and haven't witnesesed this reaction. This suggests there is (low distinctiveness of his behavior, low consistency in his behavior, low consensus of his behavior).

d) You are pretty confident that the other guys in the meeting would have walked out if they were in Michael's shoes. In that case, they would demonstrate (high distinctiveness of his behavior, high consensus of his behavior, high consistency in his behavior).

e) BAsed on you answers to the previous questions, what attribution would you make about Michael's behavior? (Extrinsic, internal, external, intrinsic)

Answer 1

A) Since I empathize for Michael's behaviour, there is high consensus in it

B) Since the outburst was relatively unusual, there is high distinctiveness in the behaviour.

C) This is the reaction which Michael never gave before, even when put under tough situations, this show his less consistency in the behaviour.

D) Walking in Michael's shoes and thinking that one would do the same demonstrates high consensus.

E) Michael's behaviour is caused by external factors hence it is to be externally attributed.