The Actor-Observer Effect: The actor-observer bias (also actor-observer asymmetry) can be thought of as an extension of the fundamental attribution error. According to the actor-observer bias, in addition to overvaluing dispositional explanations of others’ behaviours, we tend to under-value dispositional explanations and overvalue situational explanations of our own behaviour. For example, a student who studies may explain her behaviour by referencing situational factors (e.g., I have an exam coming up), whereas others will explain her studying by referencing dispositional factors (e.g., She’s ambitious and hard-working). This bias was first proposed by Edward E. Jones’s and Richard E. Nisbett’s in 1971, who explained that “Actors tend to attribute the causes of their behaviour to stimuli inherent in the situation, while observers tend to attribute behaviour to stable dispositions of the actor”.
For this kind of approach, the self-esteem maintenance explanation gives an understanding of how we use the self-serving bias to explain the behaviour of those individuals with whom we identify. When we associate with the success of others, we can reinforce our self-esteem, as they are psychologically a part of our self-concept. A recent proposition claims that what we call self-serving bias is actually a very rational information processing outcome. The self-serving attributions are a result of our expectations for success in given situations.
The argument psychologists give here is that people expect success so whenever they are given credit for it, they readily accept. Kelly’s co-variation model states that people’s success, when it actually happens, is low in distinctiveness and high in consistency, so people make internal attribution.
People do not take responsibility for failure as much as they take credit for success which is a result of motivation, a desire to increase and protect self-esteem.
The Actor-Observer Effect: The actor-observer bias (also actor-observer asymmetry) can be thought of as an extension of the fundamental attribution error. According to the actor-observer bias, in addition to overvaluing dispositional explanations of others’ behaviours, we tend to under-value dispositional explanations and overvalue situational explanations of our own behaviour. For example, a student who studies may explain her behaviour by referencing situational factors (e.g., I have an exam coming up), whereas others will explain her studying by referencing dispositional factors (e.g., She’s ambitious and hard-working). This bias was first proposed by Edward E. Jones’s and Richard E. Nisbett’s in 1971, who explained that “Actors tend to attribute the causes of their behaviour to stimuli inherent in the situation, while observers tend to attribute behaviour to stable dispositions of the actor”.
For this kind of approach, the self-esteem maintenance explanation gives an understanding of how we use the self-serving bias to explain the behaviour of those individuals with whom we identify. When we associate with the success of others, we can reinforce our self-esteem, as they are psychologically a part of our self-concept. A recent proposition claims that what we call self-serving bias is actually a very rational information processing outcome. The self-serving attributions are a result of our expectations for success in given situations.
The argument psychologists give here is that people expect success so whenever they are given credit for it, they readily accept. Kelly’s co-variation model states that people’s success, when it actually happens, is low in distinctiveness and high in consistency, so people make internal attribution.
People do not take responsibility for failure as much as they take credit for success which is a result of motivation, a desire to increase and protect self-esteem.