The Use of Secular and Religious Attributions to Explain Everyday Behavior

Lupfer, Michael B.; Brock, Karla F.; DePaola, Stephen J.

doi:10.2307/1386858

Cited by 82 publications

(60 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…There is currently a paucity of research in the psychology of religion related to the impact of cognitions regarding demons upon overall psychological health. Researchers know only that attributions to Satan as a causal agent for any event are very rare (Lupfer, Brock, & Depaola, 1992;Lupfer, Depaola, Brock, & Clement, 1994;Lupfer, Tolliver, & Jackson, 1996;Weeks & Lupfer, 2000). It is striking, then, that these attributions comprise the largest set of explanations for depression in our media sample.…”

Section: Demonic Influences In the Etiology Of Depressionmentioning

confidence: 90%

Representation of mental illness in Christian self-help bestsellers

Webb

Stetz

Hedden

2008

Mental Health, Religion & Culture

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The present study examined messages about mental illness in 14 contemporary Christian self-help bestsellers. Content analysis revealed that most texts focused upon depression. Categories of textual units included Underlying Assumptions Regarding Depression, Representations of Depression, Roots/Causes/Reasons for Depression, and Christian Responses to Depression. Demonic influence was the most frequently cited reason for depression. Other reasons included negative cognitions, failure as a Christian, and negative emotions. Christian responses to depression included trusting God, religious activity, and individual willpower. Discussion of these results focused upon the problematic impact of these messages upon individuals with depression, and upon suggestions for reducing mental illness stigma in religious communities.

show abstract

Section: Demonic Influences In the Etiology Of Depressionmentioning

confidence: 90%

Representation of mental illness in Christian self-help bestsellers

Webb

Stetz

Hedden

2008

Mental Health, Religion & Culture

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…People typically perceive substantial events (e.g., a huge political scandal) as being due to substantial causes (e.g., a vast conspiracy). Persons with Christian beliefs, for example, often perceive God as the cause of substantial positive events, such as an averted catastrophe, but rarely as the cause of trivial positive events, such as finding misplaced car keys (Lupfer, Brock, & DePaola, 1992). Testing additional facets of a balance approach is another goal for later work.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Predicting the Interpersonal Targets of Self-Serving Attributions

Silvia

Duval

2001

Journal of Experimental Social Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:People will, under certain conditions, attribute failure to an external target to avoid an unfavorable selfevaluation. But to what external target do people attribute failure? Based on Fritz Heider's analysis of similarity and attribution, we predicted that failure-a negative event-would be attributed to a similarly negative external target. Participants worked on a task ostensibly created by three other people and received failure feedback. Self-awareness was either high or low, and people believed that their likelihood of improving in the future was either high or low. The valence of the fictional group members was manipulated such that one member was positive, another was mildly negative, and the third was highly negative. As in past research, highly self-aware persons who could not improve their failure attributed failure externally, relative to the other conditions. Consistent with Heider's analysis, these participants perceived the negative group members as being responsible for their failure relative to self and the positive group member. Implications for the self-serving bias are discussed. Article:People typically have many goals and motives simultaneously (Freud, 1923;Heider, 1958;Lewin, 1935), so the operation of important motives maybe obscured by parallel or contrary motives. For example, people are motivated to maintain a positive self-evaluation by achieving consistency between the self and important standards and values (Duval & Wicklund, 1972; Silvia &Duval, in press). One consequence of this motive is the -self-serving bias‖: people will attribute negative events to external causes to avoid a lowered self-evaluation (Federoff &Harvey, 1976). Yet people should not always make self-serving attributions because this is not the only important motive. In fact, the influence of additional motives is reflected in the contradictory self-serving bias literature. Some studies do find external attributions for failure (e.g., Snyder, Stephan, &Rosenfield, 1976). Other studies, however, find internal attributions for failure (e.g., Ames, 1975;Ross, Bierbrauer, &Polly, 1974;Weary et al., 1982) or no effect at all. Indeed, a recent meta-analysis (Campbell & Sedikides, 1999) and past reviews (Zuckerman, 1979) show that self-serving and other-serving attributions are both common findings.What other motives might be moderating the self-serving bias? Duval and Silvia (in press) suggest that attributional motives are a significant factor. People want to be consistent with their standards, but they also want to accurately attribute events to their most plausible cause (see Duval & Duval, 1983, for a detailed discussion). Such attributions enable a reasonably accurate understanding of the environment's causal structure (Heider, 1944(Heider, , 1958, which is useful when striving for complex goals. These two motives can be harmonious. When self is the most plausible cause for success, for example, an internal attribution will simultaneously further self-evaluative and attributional motives. But the two goals ...

show abstract

“…Health-related circumstances in particular provide fertile ground for suffering and are often met with a need to find justice and control in the illness (Pargament & Hahn, 1986). There are two attribution systems that can account for an individual's belief and behaviour: a secular system that understands human action to be caused by personality traits, and a religious/spiritual system that identifies God and/or Satan as interlocutors in life (Lupfer, Brock, & DePaola, 1992). Using this framework, several causal representatives of events are possible including self, chance (fate or luck), others, and God (Pargament & Hahn, 1986).…”

Section: Spiritual Beliefsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Spiritual Disposition and Understanding Illness

Gall

Grant

2005

Pastoral Psychol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although Dull and Skokan (1995) proposed a cognitive model of the effect of religion on health, they neglected to clearly identify the multi-dimensional nature of religion as a cognitive schema. The present paper identifies various aspects of spiritual disposition (defined as personality and beliefs) that can play a role in an individual's adaptation to illness. Specifically, this paper reviews the factors of religious doctrine and affiliation, spiritual beliefs, religious orientation, God locus of control, faith and hope as aspects of a spiritual disposition and explores how they can function as resources and/or negative factors in the process of adjustment to illness. Implications for clinical health care (e.g., pastoral counsellors) are drawn from this review.

show abstract

The Use of Secular and Religious Attributions to Explain Everyday Behavior

Cited by 82 publications

References 17 publications

Representation of mental illness in Christian self-help bestsellers

Representation of mental illness in Christian self-help bestsellers

Predicting the Interpersonal Targets of Self-Serving Attributions

Spiritual Disposition and Understanding Illness

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About