The Between Setting And Behaviour

Trevor’s actions led his peers to label him as a constant threat, as well as the school “weirdo.” Everyone, even his parents, cautioned himself or herself around him. Trevor’s own actions categorized him as a threat to all. His peers would wonder about the causes for his actions. This led them to believe in false causes. A theory in this particular case, which is widely used in this concept, is the attribution theory. This explains and states the different types of processes we use to judge behaviors

In the ways of the world it is easier to make assessments about people or objects based on a quick observation. For instance, almost everyone has heard the clique saying “Don’t judge a book by its cover.” This is a perfect scenario where looking at just what is holding the book together a decision is made on whether the book will be picked to read. In the same ways individuals tend to judge each other. Unfortunately, when quick judgments are snapped about a person or object the observer is missing out a bigger picture. This is defined as the fundamental attribution error. For example, a person kicking a vending machine over and over may not have an anger management problem. Although, the observer may make this assumption as they walk by not

The Fundamental Attribution Error occurs when a person’s personality is determined based on how they act in a certain situation, but not including the situation and outside influences when making that determination. The individual could be acting a certain way based on the particular situation or social circumstances, but in all actuality be completely different in another situation. Studies show that in most cases socially we want to fit in with a group, don’t want to be different, don’t want to be wrong, and in many instances act different than what our typical personality and values are based on influencing social factors. One of the main factors that often contributes to how we act in certain situations is to obey those in authority positions. The studies provided below are examples of the show how behaviors can change based on social factors.

Attribution theory: an attempt when individuals observe behavior to determine whether it is internally or externally caused

It can be said that fundamental attribution error is the tendency for observers to overestimate the influence of personal characteristics and to underestimate the influence of situational characteristics. When people are trying to understand and explain what happens in social settings, people tend to view behavior as a particularly significant factor and tend to explain behavior in terms of internal disposition (such as personality traits, abilities, motives, etc.) as opposed to external situational factors, which can be due to focus on the person more than their situation, about which we may know very little, and also know little about how they are interpreting the situation (Fundamental, n.d.). In an internal or dispositional attribution, people infer that an event or a person’s behavior is due to personal factors such as traits,

The fundamental attribution error, also called the correspondence bias or attribution effect, is the tendency for people to place an undue emphasis on internal characteristics of the agent (character or intention), rather than external factors, in explaining another person’s behavior in a given situation. This contrasts with interpreting one’s own behavior, where situational factors are more easily recognized and can be taken into account. An example of this would be a driver starting to go through green light but another driver runs through a perpendicular red light, causing the green light driver to think the red light driver is reckless. However, the red light driver might be rushing someone to the hospital. In conclusion, the green light thinks this reflects red light fundamental nature of a reckless attitude.

Attribution explanation (of why something works or happens the way it does), deals with how the sets of very negative beliefs by others uses information to arrive at proof that one thing definitely causes another explanations events. It examines what information is gathered and how it is combined to form a (proof that one thing definitely causes another) judgment” (Fiske, & Taylor, 1991)

The theoretical and practical implications of inconsistent and consistent information in the Psychology of Stereotypical Behavior differentiates in two ways. With consistent information, a group is known for certain behaviors (negative or positive), and the subject who is analyzing the behavior may lose interest since the known behavior is consistent with the stereotype. However, when a group shows inconsistencies of the perceived stereotypical behaviors, then the analyzer will question the inconsistencies, and give specific attention to the group.

When Mary brought her fiancé to meet her family during thanksgiving, he spoke loudly to the point where it was irritating. Mary’s aunt then commented on her disbelief that Mary was going to marry a man with a personality like that. She attributed Mary’s fiancé’s behavior to an internal attribution, his personality, instead of holding the pressure of making the first impression to be responsible of the fiancé’s forced behaviors. Mary’s aunt made a dispositional attribution that many have been a result of correspondence bias, which is “the tendency to make dispositional attributions instead of situational attributions” (Text, p.406). At an instance, Mary’s aunt chose to make dispositional attributions and assumed that the fiancé had an annoying personality. Although, if Mary’s and her fiancé’s roles were reverse, she may have acted the same way: loud and aggravating.

In todays society, you can not turn on the tv or radio without hearing some type of denigrating remark. Unfortunately its the cause of all the social norms. Our nation has been brainwashed by so many factors. Such as tv, radio, Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, etc. This topic reminds me a lot of a section in my psycology class “Behavior in Social and Cultural Context”. It talks about attributions within social influences, behavior, ethnic identity, and stereotypes. Which could not fit anymore perfectly with what is going on in the world today, and this topic.

1. Wallace’s central message is that all of us are so engrossed individuals that sometimes we ignore our surroundings. That we are all preprogrammed, living in our own self-centered world. Rarely do we realize that we all exist in a structured box that everyone struggles to get out of. Lastly, in response to his speech Wallace advises his listeners to take a moment and look beyond themselves, and see what is truly happening.

The purpose of the concept application paper is to relate one social psychological concept presented in the text to an experience which has happened in my life. The concept I will be using is misattribution. Misattribution is simply making an incorrect attribution, it is making a misconception of some ones behavior.

Fundamental attribution effect is our tendency to explain others behavior based on internal factors like personality and disposition. We have the tendency to underestimate the influence that situational influences have on others behaviors. The fundamental attribution effect is when the influence of external factors such as situational influences have on another persons behavior and has implications on how people reach dispositional assumptions.

Attribution theory explains how individuals explain their own and the other peoples behaviour around them. External attributions are distinct to a situation or social concept that explains why a person behaves they way they do (Aronson, Wilson, Fehr, & Akert, 2013). In this article, external attributions may explain why the dog owners are panicking and appear to be frightened. It is not that all dog owners are scared of what might happen to their pets, but what has been happing and the situation they have been put into that make them appear this way. The importance of subjective construct also applies here. Subjective constructs explain that the way people interpret a situation usually influences the situation a lot more then the objective reality of the actual situation (Droogendyk, 2016). Here that is shown in how the people are reacting and interpret the situation to be much more dangerous then it might actually

Heider's theory of attribution was further worked on by psychologist Bernard Weiner and some of his friends in the 1970s and 1980s, and this new tool has been used primarily in current attribution research. Final inputs to the attribution theory were provided by psychologist Harold Kelley, worked on other factors like consistency, distinctiveness, and consensus and its effects on individuals to validate their perceptions.