Abstract
Although there is considerable support for the hypothesis that people attribute more dispositional traits to others than to themselves, the use of trait adjectives in this kind of research results in a number of methodological problems. The present study addresses the possible confounding of preference for a “situational” description with response uncertainty. Subjects were required to attribute traits to themselves, to a “typical smoker,” and to a “typical nonsmoker,” the response format being varied between conditions. Subjects attributed more traits to themselves than to others, and more to similar others than to dissimilar others. Further analysis indicated that a “situational attribution” in this type of trait-inference research is confounded with response uncertainty. It is concluded that one should be cautious in interpreting personality trait ratings as indicators of basic attributional processes.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Anderson, N.H. (1968). Likeableness ratings of 555 personality-trait words.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 9, 272–279.
Bentler, P.M., & Speckart, G. (1979). Models of attitude-behavior relations.Psychological Review, 86, 452–464.
Byrne, D. (1971).The attraction paradigm. New York: Academic Press.
Cantril, H. (1946). The intensity of an attitude.Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 41, 129–136.
Eiser, J.R. (1982). Addiction as attribution: Cognitive processes in giving up smoking. In J.R. Eiser (Ed.),Social psychology and behavioral medicine. London: Wiley.
Fiske, S.T., & Cox, M.G. (1979). Person concepts: The effect of target familiarity and descriptive purpose on the process of describing others.Journal of Personality, 47, 135–161.
Goldberg, L.R. (1978). Differential attribution of trait-descriptive terms to oneself as compared to well-liked, neutral, and disliked others: A psychometric analysis.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 36, 1012–1028.
Goldberg, L.R. (1981). Unconfounding situational attributions from uncertain neutral, and ambiguous ones: A psychometric analysis of descriptions of oneself and various types of others.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 41, 517–552.
Greenberg, M.S., Saxe, L., & Bar-Tal, D. (1978). Perceived stability of trait labels.Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 4, 59–62.
Kelley, H.H., & Michela, J.L. (1980). Attribution Theory and Research.Annual Review of Psychology, 31, 457–501.
Kuiper, N.A., & Rogers, T.B. (1977). Encoding of personal information: Self-other differences.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 499–514.
Monson, T.C., & Snyder, M. (1977). Actors, observers, and the attribution process: Toward a reconceptualization.Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 13, 89–111.
Monson, T.C., Tanke, E.D., & Lund, J. (1980). Determinants of social perception in a naturalistic setting.Journal of Research in Personality, 14, 104–120.
Moreland, R.L., & Zajonc, R.B. (1982). Exposure effects in person perception: Familiarity, similarity, and attraction.Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 18, 395–415.
Nisbett, R.E., Caputo, C., Legant, P., & Marecek, J. (1973). Behavior as seen by the actor and as seen by the observer.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 27, 154–164.
Rogers, T.B., Kuiper, N.A., & Kirker, W.S. (1977). Self-reference and the encoding of personal information.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 35, 677–688.
Suchman, E.A. (1950). The intensity component in attitude and opinion research. In S.A. Stouffner et al. (Eds.),Measurement and prediction. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Van Der Pligt, J., Eiser, J.R. Attribution of traits to self and others: Situationality vs. Uncertainty. Current Psychology 3, 45–51 (1984). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02686531
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02686531