Heider (1946,1958)
The study of attribution processes began with the work of Heider (1946, 1958). The implicit assumption, according to Heider, is that people function as "naive" scientists. In other words, people strive to hold accurate opinions and beliefs about events and behavior. In doing so, they discover factors that give rise to or explain an outcome.
Kelley (1972)
Kelley, a social psychologist, developed the covariation model. The model explains how people process information to make causal attributions for the behavior of the self and others. He says that people look for three sources of data to explain the reason individuals engage in a particular behavior or perform at a certain level:
1. Consistency of the action - Does the person engage in the behavior on a regular and consistent basis?
2. Level of consensus - Do others engage in the same behavior or is it unique to the individual?
3. Distinctiveness of the action - Does the person engage in the behavior on several occasions? Or is the behavior
distinctive to one situation?
1. Consistency of the action - Does the person engage in the behavior on a regular and consistent basis?
2. Level of consensus - Do others engage in the same behavior or is it unique to the individual?
3. Distinctiveness of the action - Does the person engage in the behavior on several occasions? Or is the behavior
distinctive to one situation?
Causal Attribution (Error) in Organizational Settings
Mitchell (1981) was one of the first I/O researchers to use attribution processes to predict and explain leadership and performance appraisal behavior. In a series of studies, he investigated factors that influence a supervisor's causal attribution of behavior when confronted with incidents of poor work performance. What he found was that supervisors tend to attribute poor work performance to internal (e.g. personality traits) rather than external factors (e.g. peer influence). Moreover, the bias toward internal attributions increases if the employee has a history of poor work performance. The manner in which the supervisor responds to poor work performance depends on the type of attribution made. For example, the more internal the attribution, the more disciplinary action was recommended versus a training program that would benefit the entire staff. Consistent with Kelley's covariation model, Mitchell found consistency, consensus, and distinctiveness to be relevant dimensions on which supervisors base attributions (Seijts & Latham, 2003).