What Is Fundamental Attribution Error, And Why Does It Matter?
The fundamental attribution error (FAE) is a type of cognitive bias called an attributional bias that can change how a person perceives the actions of those around them. Social psychologists have heavily studied the FAE since the late 1960s. It can be extremely common, and nearly everyone has experienced the FAE as both the "biaser" and "biasee." The FAE can impact a person's social interactions, and it may be present when interacting with friends, co-workers, and family. Cognitive biases, including the FAE, are not usually conscious processes. Biases tend to occur without the person actively considering their own thoughts or perceptions, and it can take a proactive approach to mitigate the effects of the FAE. Online therapy can be one part of this proactive approach.
Attributions
People's attributions tend to describe how they define their and others' locus of causality. In this term, "locus" refers to either an internal or external factor, and "causality" refers to the cause or source of a person's behavior. In essence, a person's attributions can determine if they hold the person themselves responsible for a particular behavior (internal locus) or hold an outside circumstance responsible (external locus).
Consider the following two examples of employees who work at the same business:
Bob is frequently late to work because he often forgets to set his alarm and oversleeps.
Alice is frequently late to work because she must travel on an unreliable public transportation system.
Both Bob and Alice are going to be late to work, but how a third person (such as their employer) perceives their frequent late arrivals is likely to change considerably based on the circumstances. For example, it is possible that Alice's employer is going to be more lenient, as they have attributed Alice's lateness to an external locus of causality. Basically, Alice's employer doesn't consider her personally responsible for her lateness.
Bob, on the other hand, may have a more challenging time. Without an external circumstance to blame for his delay, such as an unreliable bus system, his employer is more likely to attribute an internal locus of causality. Bob's employer may consider him personally responsible for being late and is more likely to blame internal factors, such as Bob's personality or laziness.
As you can see, attributions can shift considerably based on the situation and the context of a person's behavior. However, a person's brain tends to make attributions constantly, regardless of how much of a situation's context is known to them. It can be rare for any one person to know all pieces of information relative to a position, and the human brain usually attempts to fill in the gaps by biasing the information it does have.
Attributional bias
Attributional biases are cognitive biases that can impact a person's attributions. Cognitive biases are usually unconscious deviations from pure rational judgment and decision-making. While this may seem like a deficit, you might imagine a world in which the human brain must carefully consider every judgment or decision. The process would likely be extremely slow. If information about a situation were unavailable, the brain might not be able to reach a conclusion at all.
For this reason, cognitive biases are often referred to as heuristics. Heuristics are usually defined as guidelines our brains use to make decisions quickly. Heuristics are normally part of a person's gut judgment and intuition. Before a person can reach an informed and rational conclusion about a situation, they have likely already reached a gut judgment using the information already apparent to them.
When a person makes a gut decision or judgment, their brain may be filling in missing pieces of information with what it assumes is likely. This process is often called biasing because the brain assigns a higher weight (bias) to things it assumes to be accurate, while assigning a lower weight to things it considers less likely to be true. Note the use of the word "assumes." The brain is normally making its best guess, and it is not always accurate, which can result in errors in judgment stemming from attributional bias.
The fundamental attribution error
Put another way, the average person is more likely to cut themselves a break when judging their own behavior and hold others personally responsible when judging theirs. Think back to the example of Alice and Bob given above. Alice and Bob frequently arrive late to work, but Alice has an external factor that gives her an excuse, or a way to reduce her accountability. Bob doesn't have a good reason and is more likely to be held accountable for being late.
In that example, the circumstances of Bob and Alice's tardiness were clearly described, but what if no context was available regarding their morning routines? If the only information an employer has is that Bob and Alice are frequently late, the employer is likely to hold each equally accountable. The fundamental attribution error tells us this may be because the employer, absent any other information, is more likely to attribute an internal locus of causality than an external one.
What if the employers themselves were also frequently late? While it may seem like the employer has added perspective that could change their judgment of Alice and Bob, the FAE tells us that the employer may be more likely to find a reason to give themselves leniency over their employees. They may "bias" their perception of their circumstances and pay closer attention to context that could excuse their own lateness.
Overcoming the fundamental attribution error
Combatting our errors in attributions doesn't usually require an in-depth analysis of our biases. Experts suggest that improving emotional intelligence can be critical, rather than trying to shift unconscious processes, like heuristics, to the conscious domain. Your brain may still need to think quickly, and improving emotional intelligence can help you assign less weight to the internal factors of others and increase the importance given to external factors. Emotional intelligence typically consists of four separate domains: self-awareness, self-control, social awareness, and social skills.
Self-awareness
Awareness of our current emotional state can be necessary for the next component of emotional intelligence, self-control. Self-awareness is normally defined as a person's ability to understand and identify their own emotional reactions. Few people are likely to be surprised by the fact that a person in a bad mood may be more likely to assign negative attributions, and a person in a good mood may be likely to assign positive attributions.
Self-regulation
Self-regulation can help a person put the brakes on their heuristic thinking when necessary. While heuristics can be helpful guidelines, it is often required to stop our reactions and consider the circumstances. Even if we don't have all the information regarding a specific situation, we can consciously assign a positive attribution.
Social awareness
Social awareness generally refers to a person's ability to perceive the emotional state of others. This can be distinct from empathizing with a person. An individual who is socially aware may understand how another person is actually feeling in the given situation, not how they themselves would feel if they were in the same situation.
Social skills
Basic social skills, like making requests, influencing others, and managing conflicts, can all be impacted by a person's attributions. Maintaining good social skills can create an environment conducive to giving information and make it easier for the context of a situation to diffuse negative attributions.
Some people are prone to overly negative attributions. Building confidence and self-esteem can defend against overly biased attributions from others, as well as help you manage your own attributions.
How can online therapy help?
Many people struggle to find the time to attend therapy sessions, and online therapy with BetterHelp may be one way to solve that problem. If you're interested in improving your emotional intelligence but struggle to justify the time commitment of a weekly therapy session, online therapy can cut out the time of driving to an office and waiting for the appointment.
Online therapy sessions typically rely on the same empirically supported techniques present in traditional therapy appointments, such as cognitive behavioral therapy, which is a well-supported method for improving emotional intelligence. Evidence suggests that visiting a therapist online from the comfort of your own home can be just as effective as conducting the session in person.
Takeaway
What is fundamental attribution error (FAE)?
The fundamental attribution error is a well-established concept in experimental social psychology. Developed by intuitive psychologist Lee Ross, fundamental attribution error refers to the common cognitive bias where individuals tend to attribute other people's behaviors and actions to their underlying personality traits or dispositions rather than considering the situational factors that might have influenced their actions.
In simpler terms, the FAE occurs when we attribute other people's behavior to their character or personality while neglecting the impact of external circumstances. This cognitive bias leads us to overemphasize the role of inherent traits in explaining why someone acted the way they did. Fundamental attribution error forms through our tendency to use cognitive shortcuts or heuristics that help us quickly judge others without fully considering all the available information.
For example, if we see someone acting impatiently in a long line at a store, we might assume they are naturally an impatient person, failing to consider that they might be in a hurry due to an emergency or personal factors causing their behavior. Spontaneous trait inference is one of the reasons why fundamental attribution error occurs, where we automatically infer personality traits from someone's behavior without considering the situational factors influencing their actions.
As a correspondence bias, the FAE can significantly affect our relationships and interactions with others. When we make assumptions about someone's character based on their behavior, we may judge them unfairly and miss the opportunity to understand their true intentions. As a result, FAE can lead to misunderstandings, stereotypes, and judgmental attitudes. Awareness of this bias can help us make more accurate assessments of people's actions by considering their individual characteristics and the situational context.
What is an example of a fundamental attribution error?
An example of the fundamental attribution error can be seen in how we perceive and judge the behavior of others in various situations. Let's consider a specific scenario:
Imagine driving on a busy highway, and suddenly, a car cuts in front of you without a turn signal. Your immediate reaction might be to assume that the driver is reckless, inconsiderate, or simply a bad driver. This reaction is a manifestation of the FAE.
In this case, you are making internal attributions about the driver's behavior, attributing it to their character or disposition (e.g., they are a rude person). However, you may not consider external factors that could explain the driver's actions, such as a medical emergency, a malfunctioning turn signal, or a sudden obstacle on the road. While the observed behavior may indicate the driver's personality, failing to consider external factors is an example of fundamental attribution error.
The FAE occurs because we tend to overemphasize personal characteristics when explaining the behavior of others while underestimating the influence of situational factors. This incorrect attribution process makes us jump to conclusions about people based on their apparently freely chosen behaviors without fully considering the context.
In reality, the driver's behavior may be influenced by a combination of factors, and making snap judgments based solely on personal attributes can lead to misunderstandings and unfair assessments. Recognizing the presence of the FAE can encourage us to be more empathetic and open-minded when interpreting the actions of others.
It doesn't always require a positive attitude to overcome FAE. A neutral attitude can sometimes help us avoid making incorrect assumptions about others. However, a willingness to consider the situational context and being open to new information can significantly reduce the impact of this bias.
What are the two fundamental attribution errors?
The defensive attribution hypothesis (DAH) and the self-serving bias (SSB) are two well-established subtypes of the fundamental attribution error in clinical psychology. These types of counterfactual thinking describe how people attribute their successes and failures to dispositional factors while attributing others' successes and failures to situational factors.
DAH suggests that we attribute positive outcomes to personal attributes (e.g., intelligence, skill, hard work), while negative outcomes are attributed to external circumstances beyond our control. This bias is a protective mechanism for our self-esteem, shielding us from feelings of incompetence or failure. For example, if someone receives a promotion at work, they may attribute it to their hard work and dedication rather than considering factors such as luck or support from others.
On the other hand, SSB describes how we tend to attribute our successes to internal factors while attributing failures to external circumstances. For instance, if someone fails an exam, they may blame the difficulty of the test or unfair grading rather than acknowledging their lack of preparation. In clinical research, subjects believed that their successes were due to internal factors and their failures due to external factors, such as luck or task difficulty. This bias allows us to maintain a positive self-image and enhances our sense of control over situations.
In summary, both DAH and SSB are forms of fundamental attribution error that highlight how people tend to attribute their behavior differently than they do to others. Recognizing these biases can help us understand our thought processes better and make more accurate assessments of ourselves and those around us. When we understand our tendency for FAE, we can work towards reducing its impact on our relationships and interactions with others.
What is the fundamental attribution error and blame?
The fundamental attribution error and blame often go hand in hand. The FAE refers to our tendency to overemphasize personal characteristics when explaining the behavior of others while underestimating situational factors. Conversely, blame is a form of criticism or judgment directed towards someone for their perceived mistakes or wrongdoing.
While different, these two concepts are related because the FAE can often lead to blaming others for their actions or behaviors. When we make assumptions about someone's character based on their behavior, it becomes easier to blame them rather than consider external factors that may have influenced their actions. These assumptions can lead to misunderstandings and strained relationships when we assign blame without fully considering the situational context.
For example, if a coworker consistently misses deadlines, our immediate reaction may be to assume they are lazy or irresponsible. As a result, we may place blame on them for not completing their tasks on time. However, we may not consider other factors that could have contributed to their missed deadlines, such as an overwhelming workload or personal issues outside of work.
What is the fundamental attribution error in terms of morality?
Fundamental attribution error, in terms of morality, refers to the tendency of individuals to attribute moral actions or behaviors to a person's character or disposition rather than considering the impact of situational factors, context, or external circumstances. FAE arises from our natural inclination to make judgments about a person's moral character based on their actions without fully understanding the complexity of their situation.
Morality is a highly subjective concept influenced by individual beliefs, cultural norms, and personal circumstances. What one person considers a moral act may be perceived differently by another. The FAE comes into play when we oversimplify our assessments of moral behavior by assuming that someone's actions reflect their inherent moral character.
For instance, if someone is caught stealing, the FAE might lead us to label them as inherently dishonest or morally corrupt without taking into account the possibility of extenuating circumstances, such as extreme poverty or desperation. We may fail to consider that the person's actions were influenced by external factors, which can blur the lines of morality.
Recognizing the FAE in discussions of morality is essential because it encourages us to be more empathetic and understanding of the complexities involved in moral decision-making. It reminds us that moral judgments should not solely rest on attributions of character but should take into account the broader context and individual circumstances that shape moral behavior. By doing so, we can approach discussions of morality with greater nuance and avoid hasty, overly simplistic moral assessments.
What is an example of attribution of blame?
Attribution of blame, also known as the attribution of responsibility, is a cognitive process through which individuals assign causality or fault for a particular event or outcome. This process involves identifying who or what is accountable for a specific situation or action. Attribution of blame plays a significant role in our daily interactions, problem-solving, and decision-making processes.
Here's an example to illustrate the attribution of blame:
Imagine a scenario where two coworkers, Alex and Morgan, are collaborating on a project with a tight deadline. Unfortunately, the project ends up being delayed, and both of them are frustrated about the situation.
- Alex's attribution of blame: Alex attributes blame primarily to Morgan. They believe that Morgan's procrastination, lack of effort, and frequent distractions caused the project's delay. Alex thinks, "Morgan is irresponsible and lazy. It's their fault that we missed the deadline."
- Morgan's attribution of blame: Morgan, on the other hand, attributes blame to external factors. They believe that the project's scope was too ambitious, that they were given insufficient resources, and that external interruptions also played a significant role. Morgan thinks, "The project's unrealistic demands and limited resources made it impossible to complete on time. It's not entirely my fault."
In this example, both Alex and Morgan engage in the attribution of blame, but they attribute responsibility differently. Alex places the blame on Morgan's character and actions, while Morgan focuses on external factors that contributed to the project's delay.
Attribution of blame is not always straightforward, as it can be influenced by various factors, including cognitive biases, social context, and individual perspectives. People may have different attributions of blame for the same event, leading to disagreements and conflicts. Understanding these attributions can be valuable in resolving disputes, improving teamwork, and fostering better communication among individuals with divergent perspectives.
Is the fundamental attribution error good or bad?
The fundamental attribution error is a cognitive bias that refers to the tendency to attribute other people's behaviors to their internal characteristics, such as personality traits or disposition while underestimating the influence of situational factors. Whether the FAE is good or bad depends on the context and how it's applied.
Negative Aspects of the FAE:
- Unfair judgments: The FAE can lead to unfair judgments and stereotyping. For example, if someone sees a person being rude to a waiter, they might attribute it to that person's inherent rudeness, ignoring the possibility that the person is having a bad day or experiencing stress.
- Conflict: FAE can contribute to misunderstandings and conflicts in relationships, both personal and professional. People may misinterpret the intentions of others, leading to resentment and damaged relationships.
- Lack of empathy: When people make snap judgments based on the FAE, they may be less empathetic and understanding toward others. These judgments can hinder effective communication and problem-solving.
Positive Aspects of the FAE:
- Self-protective mechanism: FAE can serve as a self-protective mechanism. When we attribute our mistakes or failures to external factors (situational attributions), it can help protect our self-esteem. For example, if we perform poorly on a test, we might attribute it to a difficult exam rather than our lack of ability.
- Promotes accountability: In some cases, the FAE can hold individuals accountable for their actions. When people believe that their behavior reflects their character, they may be more likely to act in socially responsible ways.
- Motivation for change: When faced with the FAE, individuals might feel motivated to prove others wrong by improving their behavior. For example, if someone is labeled as "lazy," they may work harder to challenge that perception.
While FAE can lead to unfair judgments and misunderstandings, it can also serve as a self-protective mechanism and promote accountability. Recognizing the FAE and its potential pitfalls can help individuals make more informed and fair judgments about others, leading to better interpersonal relationships and more accurate assessments of behavior. Ultimately, whether the FAE is "good" or "bad" depends on how it is used and whether it is applied with empathy and understanding.
- Previous Article
- Next Article