Attribution Error In The Fox And The Grapes

The Fundamental Attribution Error becomes more culture specific when it comes to how specific, or which type, of explanation that particular person or culture decides to use. When it comes to describing a good or bad event that has occurred, the way each culture is developed to think, will affect which attribution that group will use. Besides the study by Morris and Peng, another psychologist, Joan Miller, showed the difference of which attribution is chosen between Americans and Hindu East Indians. It showed that the older a person gets within their particular culture, the more likely they will be to follow the norms of attributions; Americans referring to the dispositional attribution and the Hindu East Indians referring to the situational attribution. Overall, around the world many cultures may use a mix of these attributions from the fundamental attribution error when it comes to describing people’s actions, but based off the studies, it shows that the fundamental attribution error demonstrates to be more culture specific than it would

Situational Attribution: Believing the cause of a behavior is based on the person’s situation, not their attitude. An example of this in the movie was when Judy found out the reason for predators going savage was due to the flowers, not due to their attitudes or genetics.

Attribution as defined as “ the process of attaching meaning to another person’s behavior” (Chapter 4, 123). Pat and Tiffany are at a diner together getting acquainted with each other, as Pat eats his raisin brans and Tiffany drinks her tea, Pat asks Tiffany to give a letter to his wife. Tiffany explains she has to be careful as she already lost her job and Pat ask how she got fired, Tiffany replies “ for having sex with everybody in the office.” Tiffany explains the reason that she was very depressed after her husband Tommy died and there was a lot of people at the office at the time. Within this scene, I understand the behavior in which Tiffany had casual sex with strangers, and the meaning for her behavior was make friends easier after the unfortunate death of her husband

The fundamental attribution error is adaptive because it allows an individual to process information quickly. For instance, in the previous example, individuals driving along notice the accident and quickly attribute the driver’s personality as reckless. When individuals driving along make this attribution, they fail to acknowledge how the driver feels. Hence, the fundamental attribution error can be extremely harmful because unanticipated outcomes cause anxiety and discomfort (Attribution lecture, February 4, 2016). The driver did not cause the accident, though individuals driving along believe the driver did which inflicts anxiety and discomfort onto the driver involved in the

Attributions are the next facet of the four cognitive processes that can be seen in The Whore’s Child. They are defined as “assessments of the cause of an action or behavior,” (Canary 111) and can be both internal and external. Internal meaning that the behavior is attributed to qualities such as

Deep down inside, each person has a strong desire for a companion. Someone you can trust, who you can learn from and teach, but most importantly, one who can always be there for you no matter what happens. The relationship between the intelligent and feeble George Milton and the imbecile, but vigorous Lennie Small is displayed as the main objective in Steinbeck 's novel, Of Mice and Men. The description among these two characters is a form of juxtaposition because the two characters vary in several ways. The author’s intention of using this technique points out the differences between characters and how their personalities counteract each other significantly.

The fundamental attribution error intrigued me while reading the book because I came across the example about Hurricane Katrina. I lived through this experience so I felt it was only right that I talk about my take. The definition of the fundamental attribution error is assuming someone’s personality based on their actions, even when there are powerful outside forces that can be influencing them. Hurricane Katrina was a horrible natural disaster that no one could have predicted would happen but none the less it happened. I remember my family and I watching the news together and coming to the crippling conclusion that we had to leave everything we had behind. Of course, we were used to this because we lived in what they call “the soup bowl” and we were used to emergency evacuations for hurricanes. There was no

Man is one with nature. John Steinbeck opens The Grapes of Wrath with a chapter regarding the connection between the people of the land and the land itself. The first chapter sets the tone for the rest of the novel, creating a sense emotional unity and togetherness. The rhetorical devices applied in the opening chapter allow the reader to grasp the mood of rest of The Grapes of Wrath. Through repetition, generalizations, and personification, Steinbeck establishes the connection between the migrant people and the land.

In the novel, The Grapes of Wrath, John Steinbeck uses many of the literary devices to emphasize the conditions of the people migrating to California. One that I found obvious and recurring in the novel was repetition. There are many instances in the novel where words, images, or phrases are repeated to bring the condition of certain situations to life.In the quote above Steinbeck uses repetition to create an ethereal trance and stress the desperate times of the Dust Bowl era. The overuse of “listen” has a sense of movement. The reader also gets to feel that he is apart of the story feeling the increase of reality. Also the use of “you” by Tom, the narrator makes the reader feel amid with the Joad family who have sold everything they owned

Whereas "internal" or "dispositional" attribution assigns causality to factors within the person, such as their own level of intelligence or other variables that make the individual responsible for the event.

Cognitive dissonance means feeling tension when our thoughts and beliefs are inconsistent. An example of this is when people smoke even though they are aware of the consequences that can occur such as cancer which leads to cognitive dissonance. This occurs almost everyday in our lives, whether we are aware of it or not. An one example that was shown on one of the episodes of Friends made us aware of this happening.

Such findings have therefore highlighted some flaws to their ‘objective’ claims towards this theory. For example: it has been found that when we explain the behaviour of other people, we tend to favour internal rather than external attributions, this is called the fundamental attribution error (FAE). Jones and Davis (cited in Buchanan et al, 2007) suggest that the reason we do this is because internal attributions are more useful. Internal attributions tell us something about the person which helps us to predict how they might behave in other situations, implying that we (the observer) seek to ‘make sense’ of the person (the actor) rather than simply explain their behaviour in an objective or rational way. But rather than refer to this as an ‘error’, it is more appropriate to put it down to our own biases, as the FAE tends to disappear when we explain our own behaviour which is known as the

Fundamental Attribution Error justifies how individuals explain the actions of other individuals. For example; Just the other day I saw one of my students ask a boy out as boyfriend and girlfriend, but immediately got declined. I honestly was in shock when she did that because she didn’t know how to ask the proper way. I right away predicted that she had intentions of him saying no to her because he wasn’t looking for companionship. I think when situations like this occur whether it be negative or positive we always tend to blame an individuals characteristics and or personality rather than a specific issue. In the past, I have had many people judging me and thinking the worst just because of how I present myself and mainly how I have a strong attitude. I’ve always had pride on everything I desired to do, and when someone tells me to do something I most likely won’t listen to you

Jim’s father may be attributing the grades being what they are because Jim is not spending as much time as possible to studying, the group of friends that Jim hangs out with, or Jim not trying. Jim and his father could be making the two common errors in their attributions, the self-serving bias and the fundamental attribution error, because each could be overestimating the external factors in the cause behind the grades or overestimating the internal causes of another’s behavior. They both could be applying specificity to their perception. According to Wood (2012), “Specificity explains the behavior in terms of whether the behavior has implications that apply in most or all situations (p.70).” Jim might believe that his father is too hard on him because the father made better grades in the past. The father may believe that Jim does not apply himself academically.

Kelley’s (1967) covariation model is the best known attribution theory. It is an attribution theory in which people make casual inferences to explain why other people and ourselves behave in a certain way. It is concerned with both social perception and self-perception (Kelley, 1973). He developed a logical model for judging whether a particular action should be attributed to some characteristic (internal) of the person or the environment (external).