Discounting and Augmentation of Dispositional and Causal Attributions
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5334/pb-46-3-211Abstract
This article investigates whether and how discounting and augmentation of dispositional and causal attributions differ between each other. In three experiments, the strength of a causal or dispositional attribution to a target actor (or object) was varied by manipulating the number of observations (i.e., sample size) of an alternative actor (or object). The results of Experiments 1 and 2 indicated that a greater sample size of the alternative actor (or object) resulted in greater discounting or augmentation of the target, and that this effect was alike for causal and dispositional attributions. This effect of sample size on discounting and augmentation cannot be explained by current algebraic attribution models, but is consistent with predictions from a connectionist framework. In Experiment 3, the extraction of information was made more difficult, and the effect of sample size on discounting and augmentation remained robust for causal attributions, whereas it disappeared for dispositional attributions. This failure for dispositional attributions was not predicted by any theoretical model. The discussion focuses on some potential explanations for this unexpected finding.Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2006 The Author(s)

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms. If a submission is rejected or withdrawn prior to publication, all rights return to the author(s):
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
Submitting to the journal implicitly confirms that all named authors and rights holders have agreed to the above terms of publication. It is the submitting author's responsibility to ensure all authors and relevant institutional bodies have given their agreement at the point of submission.
Note: some institutions require authors to seek written approval in relation to the terms of publication. Should this be required, authors can request a separate licence agreement document from the editorial team (e.g. authors who are Crown employees).