The cognitive dynamics of salience in the attribution process.

Pryor, John B.; Kriss, Mitchel

doi:10.1037/0022-3514.35.1.49

Cited by 213 publications

(108 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

102

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…He concluded that such episodic stories evoke individualistic attributions of responsibility for the societallevel problems emphasized in the news frame. These findings are consistent with earlier investigations in social psychology that established attribution processes are susceptible to accessibility effects (e.g., Anderson and Slusher 1986;Pryor and Kriss 1977;Rholes and Pryor 1982;Smith and Miller 1979). For example, Rholes and Pryor (1982) provided data showing that recently activated causal agents are given more weight in making causal judgments.…”

Section: Issue Framing In Policy Debatessupporting

confidence: 81%

Gun Policy, Opinion, Tragedy, and Blame Attribution: The Conditional Influence of Issue Frames

Haider‐Markel

Joslyn

2001

The Journal of Politics

277

207

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Political events and policy discussion set parameters for debate and help to determine how an issue comes to be defined. Though existing research has examined the effects of alternative representations of political issues on public opinion, less attention has been given to highly salient issues, such as gun policy, and the potential effect of framing on causal attributions of blame for tragic events. This study expands the framing research to include opinion on policies concerning guns as well as the attributions of blame following the school shooting in Littleton, Colorado. We test several hypotheses using data from two field polls—one examining support for concealed handgun laws and the other examining blame attribution following the shootings at Columbine High School. We find that alternative gun frames influence opinion about concealed handgun laws as well as attributions of blame for Columbine. However, the effect is conditional, hinging on the nature of respondents' predisposition and existing knowledge. We consider these findings within the context of the policy‐making process.

show abstract

Section: Issue Framing In Policy Debatessupporting

confidence: 81%

Gun Policy, Opinion, Tragedy, and Blame Attribution: The Conditional Influence of Issue Frames

Haider‐Markel

Joslyn

2001

The Journal of Politics

277

207

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…If an implicit misattribution mechanism is at work, individuals should be more likely to misattribute the evaluation activated by the US to the CS when that CS is relatively salient. A well-documented finding in attribution research is that as the salience of a plausible causal source increases, so does the likelihood that individuals will make attributions to that source (Heider, 1958;Jones & Nisbett, 1971;Pryor & Kriss, 1977;Taylor & Fiske, 1978). Therefore, source confusion is likely when the actual source of the evaluation is low in salience while another appropriate object is highly salient.…”

Section: Studymentioning

confidence: 99%

Implicit Misattribution as a Mechanism Underlying Evaluative Conditioning

Jones¹,

Fázio²,

Olson³

2007

PsycEXTRA Dataset

108

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Evaluative conditioning (EC) refers to the formation or change of an attitude towards an object following that object's pairing with positively or negatively valenced stimuli. We provide evidence that EC can occur through an implicit misattribution mechanism in which an evaluative response evoked by a valenced stimulus is incorrectly and implicitly attributed to another stimulus, forming or changing an attitude towards this other stimulus. Five studies measured or manipulated variables related to the potential for the misattribution of an evaluation, or "source confusability." Greater EC was observed when participants' eye gaze shifted frequently between a valenced and neutral stimulus (Studies 1 & 2), when the two stimuli appeared in close spatial proximity (Study 3), and when the neutral stimulus was made more perceptually salient than the valenced stimulus due to its larger size (Study 4). In other words, conditions conducive to source confusability increased EC. Study 5 provided evidence for multiple mechanisms of EC by comparing the effects of mildly evocative valenced stimuli (those evoking responses that might more easily be misattributed to another object) to more strongly evocative stimuli.

show abstract

“…The key difference is that in the prose-copying study attention was directed to the standard immediately following failure feedback. This conjoined the aversive failure experience and the standard (Pryor & Kriss, 1977;Taylor & Fiske, 1978) and thus promoted attribution to the standard (Duval & Duval, 1983). In the moral hypocrisy study, the standard was emphasized before people made their moral decisions and had the possibility to fail.…”

Section: Changing Moral Standardsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Duval and Lalwani (1999) proposed that causal attribution is the mechanism that determines whether self or standards will be changed. Attentional focus partially determines causal attributions (Arkin & Duval, 1975;Duval & Duval, 1983;Pryor & Kriss, 1977;Taylor & Fiske, 1978), so focusing on the standard leads people to attribute the cause of the discrepancy to the standard. When attention is focused on their own performance, however, people attribute causality for the discrepancy to self.…”

Section: Attribution and Changing Standardsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Objective Self-Awareness Theory: Recent Progress and Enduring Problems

Silvia

Duval

2001

Pers Soc Psychol Rev

333

230

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:Objective self-awareness theory has undergone fundamental changes in the 3 decades since Duval and Wicklund's (1972) original formulation. We review new evidence that bears on the basic tenets of the theory. Many of the assumptions of self-awareness theory require revision, particularly how expectancies influence approach and avoidance of self-standard discrepancies; the nature of standards, especially when they are changed; and the role of causal attribution in directing discrepancy reduction. However, several unresolved conceptual issues remain; future theoretical and empirical directions are discussed. Article:The human dilemma is that which arises out of a man's capacity to experience himself as both subject and object at the same time. Both are necessary--for the science of psychology, for therapy, and for gratifying living. (May, 1967, p. 8) Although psychological perspectives on the self have a long history (e.g., Cooley, 1902;James, 1890;Mead, 1934), experimental research on the self has emerged only within the last 40 years. One of the earliest "self theories" was objective self-awareness (OSA) theory (Duval & Wicklund, 1972). OSA theory was concerned with the self-reflexive quality of the consciousness. Just as people can apprehend the existence of environmental stimuli, they can be aware of their own existence: "When attention is directed inward and the individual's consciousness is focused on himself, he is the object of his own consciousness--hence 'objective' self awareness" (Duval & Wicklund, 1972, p. 2). This is contrasted with "subjective self-awareness" that results when attention is directed away from the self and the person "experiences himself as the source of perception and action" (Duval & Wicklund, 1972, p. 3). By this, Duval and Wicklund (1972,chap. 3) meant consciousness of one's existence on an organismic level, in which such existence is undifferentiated as a separate and distinct object in the world.OSA theory has stimulated a lot of research and informed basic issues in social psychology, such as emotion (Scheier & Carver, 1977), attribution (Duval & Wicklund, 1973), attitude--behavior consistency (Gibbons, 1983), self-standard comparison (Duval & Lalwani, 1999), prosocial behavior (Froming, Nasby, & McManus, 1998), deindividuation (Diener, 1979, stereotyping (Macrae, Bodenhausen, & Milne, 1998), self-assessment (Silvia & Gendolla, in press), terror management (Arndt, Greenberg, Simon, Pyszczynski, & Solomon, 1998;Silvia, 2001), and group dynamics (Duval, 1976;Mullen, 1983). Self-focused attention is also fundamental to a host of clinical and health phenomena (Hull, 1981;Ingram, 1990;Pyszczynski, Hamilton, Greenberg, & Becker, 1991;Wells & Matthews, 1994).The study of self-focused attention continues to be a dynamic and active research area. A lot of research relevant to basic theoretical issues has been conducted since the last maj or review (Gibbons, 1990). Recent research has made progress in understanding links between self-awareness and causal attribution, the effe...

show abstract

The cognitive dynamics of salience in the attribution process.

Cited by 213 publications

References 13 publications

Gun Policy, Opinion, Tragedy, and Blame Attribution: The Conditional Influence of Issue Frames

Gun Policy, Opinion, Tragedy, and Blame Attribution: The Conditional Influence of Issue Frames

Implicit Misattribution as a Mechanism Underlying Evaluative Conditioning

Objective Self-Awareness Theory: Recent Progress and Enduring Problems

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About