Attribution approaches
People interpret behavior by inferring causes in persons and situations.
Theory family The classification describes how this account is used here; it is not an evidence rating.
Central claim
Social perceivers explain behavior by assigning causes to internal dispositions or external situations and by evaluating causal dimensions such as consistency, distinctiveness, consensus, locus, stability, and controllability.
Proposed mechanism
An observer may infer a personal disposition or attend to situational constraints, covariation across occasions (consistency, distinctiveness, and consensus), and causal dimensions such as locus, stability, and controllability. Attribution theories model how causal judgments are formed, whereas attribution biases describe systematic departures in those judgments.
Evidence: (Spielman et al., 2020); (Kelley, 1973)
What would it predict?
When observers receive clear information about constraints, dispositional judgments should sometimes decrease. Comparing an actor's and observer's information helps separate perspective from personality.
An original test formulation derived from the account, not a claim that this exact study was performed.
Evidence and status
OpenStax reviews Heider's (1958) dispositional versus situational distinction, Ross's (1977) fundamental attribution error, actor-observer and self-serving biases, and Weiner's (1985) locus, stability, and controllability dimensions, while Kelley (1967, 1973) formalized the covariation model in attribution theory.
Evidence: (Spielman et al., 2020); (Kelley, 1973)
Major contributors
Fritz Heider; Harold Kelley; Bernard Weiner; Lee Ross; Edward Jones
A selective attribution, not a complete intellectual genealogy or a sole-founder claim.
Apply the explanation
Original teaching scenario
A colleague misses a deadline. Knowing the shared server failed should change the causal judgment compared with seeing only the missed deadline.
Constructed for learning. This scenario does not report an empirical result.
Common confusion: Objective cause of behavior or excusing harmful conduct
Attribution theories study how observers infer and categorize perceived causes, which can diverge from actual determinants and does not equate explaining a situational constraint with excusing behavior.
Evidence: (Spielman et al., 2020); (Kelley, 1973)
Limits and alternatives
- A biased judgment is not a direct reading of a person's hidden motive. Common actor-observer claims are not universal, and cultural context and the information available change causal interpretation.
Evidence: (Spielman et al., 2020); (Kelley, 1973)
Textbook connection
Direct coveragePsychology 2e: 12.1 What Is Social Psychology?
This section directly discusses the account presented here. The profile is an original synthesis, not a reproduction of the textbook.
Related explanations
Sources and inspection notes
Checked October 21, 2026. An inspection date is not a publication date. Original experiments described by a textbook are not individually re-audited unless a separate primary source is listed.
- Kelley, H. H. (1973). The processes of causal attribution. American Psychologist, 28(2), 107–128. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0034225Primary theoretical article record and abstract inspected, October 21, 2026
Establishes Kelley's covariation model (consistency, distinctiveness, and consensus) and causal schemas in attribution theory alongside the textbook overview.
- Spielman, R. M., Jenkins, W. J., & Lovett, M. D. (2020). Psychology 2e. OpenStax. https://openstax.org/books/psychology-2e/pages/12-1-what-is-social-psychologyTextbook section inspected, October 21, 2026
Covers dispositional versus situational explanations, the fundamental attribution error (Ross, 1977), actor-observer and self-serving biases, cultural variation, and Weiner's attribution dimensions (locus, stability, and controllability).