Search

Understanding the causes of human behavior is essential for advancing one’s interests and for coordinating social relations. The scientific study of how people arrive at such understandings or explanations has unfolded in four distinguishable epochs in psychology, each characterized by a different metaphor that researchers have used to represent how people think as they attribute causality and blame to other individuals. The first epoch was guided by an “intuitive scientist” metaphor, which emphasized whether observers perceived behavior to be caused by the unique tendencies of the actor or by common reactions to the requirements of the situation. This metaphor was displaced in the second epoch by an “intuitive lawyer” depiction that focused on the need to hold people responsible for their misdeeds. The third epoch was dominated by theories of counterfactual thinking, which conveyed a “person as reconstructor” approach that emphasized the antecedents and consequences of imagining alternatives to events, especially harmful ones. With the current upsurge in moral psychology, the fourth epoch emphasizes the moral-evaluative aspect of causal judgment, reflected in a “person as moralist” metaphor. By tracing the progression from the person–environment distinction in early attribution theories to present concerns with moral judgment, our goal is to clarify how causal constructs have been used, how they relate to one another, and what unique attributional problems each addresses.

A limitation of most comparative bias studies is that they lack an objective criterion against which to assess the accuracy of self-evaluations. Furthermore, comparisons are usually made with large populations or “average peers” rather than specific others. To assess the robustness of self-enhancement when strong reality constraints are imposed, we created a video dating paradigm in which participants made profiles that they believed would be evaluated by opposite-sex peers. Blocks of seven profiles were created, and participants ranked their own profiles and estimated how others who viewed their videos would rank them (metaperceptions). Each actor was yoked to one observer who saw and ranked the same block of profiles. Despite the presence of an external reality check, participants in all three studies evinced strong self-enhancement tendencies as measured in self-rankings and metaperception judgments that exceeded those provided by observers.

Two studies examined the effect of enacting a social role on perceptions of a partner in a simulated interaction. Subjects were led to believe they were interacting with a partner whom they saw on a TV monitor (which actually showed a videotaped recording). Subjects evaluated the introversion/extraversion of their 'interaction partner. " Those instructed to enact an introvert role saw the partner as more extraverted than those who enacted an extravert role. Study 2 showed that, compared with a control group that did not enact a role, extraverts saw the person as more introverted (though not statistically significantly so), whereas introverts saw the person as more extraverted. Neither study found an effect of subjects' actual personality classification as introverts or extraverts. These findings have implications for the relative importance of temporary and chronic construct activation in social perception.

Complaining is a pervasive and important form of social communication but one whose social communicative functions have yet to be subject to empirical investigation. The present study was the first to examine the role of complaining in everyday social interactions. College students kept diaries of the complaints they made to other people for 3 consecutive days, twice during the semester. Students recorded the complaint, the reason for expressing it, and the response it elicited. Over 75% of all complaints registered were non instrumental in nature, in that they were not directed at changing an existing state of affairs but, rather, were expressed for reasons such as to vent frustration or to solicit sympathy. The most frequent complaints involved specific behaviors of another person. The most frequent response to a complaint was to agree with the complainer's statement. The importance of complaining as a form of social communication is discussed, and a number of hypotheses are generated for future research.

Negative social evaluations for undesirable behavior are usually forestalled if behavior was constrained by personal limitations and incapacities or external coercive pressures. A study was designed to demonstrate that social evaluations are based not only on the degree of constraint that exists in the immediate situation but also on responsibility for the process by which control was inhibited Capacity-development responsibility refers to responsibility for the development of an incapacitating characteristic such as depression, alcoholism, or neurosis, whereas capacity-activation responsibility refers to responsibility for the activation of an incapacity in situations where the incapacity may produce negative outcomes. Subjects were presented with a series of vignettes that varied capacity-development and capacity-activation responsibility, as well as the severity of the outcome that occurred. Each of these factors significantly influenced judgments of blame and punishment. The implications of capacity-development and capacity-activation responsibility for social judgment are discussed, as well as avenues for further research.

The relative and combined influences of faces and bodies on judgments of physical attractiveness were assessed in a factorial design crossing 3 levels (high, moderate, and low) of face and body attractiveness. Based on preratings, 3 sets of slides were created that super imposed faces onto bodies. A second sample of subjects then rated these 27 slides (3 faces X 3 bodies X 3 sets) on physical attractiveness, intelligence, sociability, and morality. Strong effects of both face and body on attractiveness ratings were obtained. In addition, a significant interaction was obtained between faces and bodies on ratings of physical attractiveness. Faces significantly influenced ratings of intelligence, sociability, and morality, whereas bodies had a significant effect on ratings of intelligence and sociability.

An experiment was conducted to test the hypothesis that the group-size effect in an Asch-type conformity experiment is a function of the concern with being right and the concern with being liked. In addition to a manipulation of group size, there were manipulations of manner of responding (public or private) and of the nature of the judgments (objectively determined or undetermined). Consistent with expectations, each of the latter two variables interacted with group size. There was also a significant main effect for group size, and a significant deviation from control indicating that conformity occurs with private judgments relating to objective stimuli.