The group attribution error

Abstract There is a parallel between our tendency to infer the attitudes of an individual on the basis of his or her behavior, regardless of the external constraints ( Jones & Harris, 1967 ; Ross, 1977 ), and our tendency to infer the attitudes of a group on the basis of the group's decision, regardless of the group decision rule. The present research focuses on this latter process. What we term the group attribution error consists of the tendency to assume that group decisions reflect members' attitudes. This assumption can be erroneous because group decision rules, in addition to members' attitudes, can influence group decisions. In Experiment 1, members of a community in which a water conservation law was or was not instituted were assumed to have correspondent attitudes, regardless of how the community decision was made. In Experiments 2 and 3, subjects inferred a greater correspondence between out-group decisions and out-group attitudes than between an in-group decision and in-group attitudes. The fourth experiment found that subjects committed the group attribution error because they attended as much to the outcome of a recall election as to the actual proportion of voters for and against the recall. Finally, Experiment 5 showed that subjects' inferences of jury members' attitudes were influenced not only by the final jury vote but also by the actual decision, which was determined by the vote plus the decision rule by which the jury was bound. The results are related to previous research on the fundamental attribution error, stereotyping, and polarized appraisals of out-groups.

[1]  Timothy D. Wilson,et al.  Telling more than we can know: Verbal reports on mental processes. , 1977 .

[2]  P. Linville,et al.  The complexity–extremity effect and age-based stereotyping. , 1982 .

[3]  M. Rothbart,et al.  Perception of Out-Group Homogeneity and Levels of Social Categorization: Memory for the Subordinate Attributes of In-Group and Out-Group Members , 1982 .

[4]  V. A. Harris,et al.  The Attribution of Attitudes , 1967 .

[5]  E. E. Jones,et al.  The actor and the observer: Divergent perceptions of the causes of behavior. , 1972 .

[6]  E. E. Jones,et al.  Polarized appraisals of out-group members. , 1980 .

[7]  R. Niemi,et al.  The Choice of Voting Systems , 1976 .

[8]  G. Āllport.  The Nature of Prejudice , 1954 .

[9]  L. Ross.  The Intuitive Psychologist And His Shortcomings: Distortions in the Attribution Process1 , 1977 .

[10]  E. E. Jones,et al.  The perception of variability within in-groups and out-groups: Implications for the law of small numbers. , 1980 .

[11]  D. Bem.  Self-Perception Theory , 1972 .

[12]  L. Ross,et al.  Human Inference: Strategies and Shortcomings of Social Judgment. , 1981 .

[13]  Thomas F. Pettigrew,et al.  The Ultimate Attribution Error: Extending Allport's Cognitive Analysis of Prejudice , 1979 .

[14]  D. Hamilton.  A Cognitive -Attributional Analysis of Stereotyping1 , 1979 .

[15]  Charles M. Judd,et al.  Knowledge structures and evaluative judgments: Effects of structural variables on judgmental extremity. , 1984 .

[16]  Timothy D. Wilson,et al.  Insensitivity to sample bias: Generalizing from atypical cases , 1980 .

[17]  E. E. Jones.  The rocky road from acts to dispositions. , 1979, The American psychologist.

[18]  G. A. Miller,et al.  Book Review Nisbett, R. , & Ross, L.Human inference: Strategies and shortcomings of social judgment.Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1980. , 1982 .

[19]  A. Tversky,et al.  Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases , 1974, Science.