Self-Serving Attributions: The Role of Physiological Arousal

Asymmetrical attributions for success and failure are an established empirical fact, but the origins of this asymmetry are still the source of some debate. The present research examined whether physiological arousal plays a role in the generation of self-serving attributional judgments. Subjects received false feedback on an achievement-related task while their skin con-ductance levels were being monitored. Subsequently, they attributed their performance to various causal factors. Although attributions for success did not vary as a function of arousal level, self-serving attributions for failure were more apparent when arousal levels were high. These findings appear consistent with the claim that attributions for failure stem, at least in part, from motivational forces. The broader implications of the findings are considered.

[1]  Dieter Frey,et al.  Misattribution of arousal and the effects of self-threatening information , 1980 .

[2]  L. Abramson.  Social cognition and clinical psychology: A synthesis. , 1988 .

[3]  M. Zuckerman,et al.  Attribution of success and failure revisited, or: The motivational bias is alive and well in attribution theory , 1979 .

[4]  S. Mednick.  The associative basis of the creative process. , 1962, Psychological review.

[5]  Shelley E. Taylor,et al.  Illusion and well-being: a social psychological perspective on mental health. , 1988, Psychological bulletin.

[6]  R. Croyle,et al.  Dissonance arousal: physiological evidence. , 1983, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[7]  L. Ross.  Problems in the Interpretation of "Self-Serving" Asymmetries in Causal Attribution: Comments on the Stephan et al. Paper , 1977 .

[8]  G. W. Bradley.  Self-serving biases in the attribution process: A reexamination of the fact or fiction question. , 1978 .

[9]  J. Cacioppo,et al.  Inferring psychological significance from physiological signals. , 1990, The American psychologist.

[10]  Jonathon D. Brown,et al.  Coming to terms with failure: Private self-enhancement and public self-effacement. , 1992 .

[11]  J. Greenberg,et al.  Toward an integration of cognitive and motivational perspectives on social inference: A biased hypothesis-testing model , 1987 .

[12]  P. Gollwitzer,et al.  Affect as a mediator of attributional egotism , 1981 .

[13]  Dale T. Miller,et al.  Self-serving biases in the attribution of causality: Fact or fiction? , 1975 .

[14]  Jonathon D. Brown,et al.  Evaluating one's abilities: Shortcuts and stumbling blocks on the road to self-knowledge , 1990 .

[15]  W. Stephan,et al.  Sex differences in attributions for sex‐typed tasks1 , 1978 .

[16]  J. Pennebaker,et al.  The psychophysiology of confession: linking inhibitory and psychosomatic processes. , 1987, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[17]  Donelson R. Forsyth,et al.  Handbook of social and clinical psychology : the health perspective , 1991 .

[18]  Jonathon D. Brown,et al.  Accuracy and bias in self-knowledge. , 1991 .

[19]  A. Freud.  The Ego and the Mechanisms of Defence , 1960 .

[20]  Jim Blascovich,et al.  On the Remote Associates Test (RAT) as an Alternative to Illusory Performance Feedback: A Methodological Note , 1984 .

[21]  F. Heider.  The psychology of interpersonal relations , 1958 .

[22]  Tom Pyszczynski,et al.  The self-serving attributional bias: Beyond self-presentation , 1982 .

[23]  Peter M. Gollwitzer,et al.  Affect as a determinant of egotism: Residual excitation and performance attributions , 1982 .