Editing Attribution bias (section)

==Current theory==
Early researchers explained attribution biases as cognitively driven and a product of information processing errors. In the early 1980s, studies demonstrated that there may also be a motivational component to attribution biases, such that their own desires and emotions affect how one interprets social information.<ref name="Kunda 1990"/><ref name="Zuckerman 1979">{{cite journal|author=Zuckerman, M.|year=1979|title=Attribution of success and failure revisited, or: The motivational bias is alive and well in attribution theory|journal=Journal of Personality|volume=47|issue=2|pages=245–287|doi=10.1111/j.1467-6494.1979.tb00202.x}}</ref> Current research continues to explore the validity of both of these explanations by examining the function of [[#Major attribution biases|specific types of attribution biases]] and their behavioral correlates through a variety of methods (e.g., research with children or using [[fMRI|brain imaging techniques]]).<ref name="Connolly and Bukszar 1990">{{cite journal|author1=Connolly, T.|author2=Bukszar, E.W.|name-list-style=amp|year=1990|title=Hindsight bias: Self-flattery or cognitive error? |journal=Journal of Behavioral Decision Making|volume=3|issue=3|pages=205–211|doi=10.1002/bdm.3960030305}}</ref><ref name="Runions and Keating 2007">{{cite journal|author1=Runions, K.C.|author2=Keating, D.P.|name-list-style=amp|year=2007|title=Children's social information processing: Family antecedents and behavioral correlates|journal=Developmental Psychology|volume=43|issue=4|pages=838–849|doi=10.1037/0012-1649.43.4.838|pmid=17605518|citeseerx=10.1.1.579.584}}</ref><ref name="Blackwood 2003">{{cite journal|author=Blackwood, N.J.|display-authors=etal|year=2003|title=Self-responsibility and the self-serving bias: an fMRI investigation of causal attributions|journal=NeuroImage|volume=20|issue=2|pages=1076–1085|doi=10.1016/S1053-8119(03)00331-8|pmid=14568477|s2cid=37340596}}</ref>

Recent research on attribution biases has focused on identifying specific types of these biases and their effect on people's behavior.<ref name="Crick and Dodge 1996"/><ref name="Hewstone 2002">{{cite journal|author1=Hewstone, M.|author2=Rubin, M.|author3= Willis, H.|s2cid=11830211|name-list-style=amp|year=2002|title=Intergroup bias|journal=Annual Review of Psychology|volume=53|issue=1|pages=575–604|doi=10.1146/annurev.psych.53.100901.135109|pmid=11752497}}</ref> Additionally, some psychologists have taken an [[applied psychology|applied]] approach and demonstrated how these biases can be understood in real-world contexts (e.g., the workplace or school).<ref name="Perry 2010">{{cite journal|author1=Perry, R.P.|author2=Stupnisky, R.H.|author3=Hall, N.C.|author4=Chipperfield, J.G.|author5=Weiner, B.|name-list-style=amp|year=2010|title=Bad starts and better finishes: Attributional retraining and initial performance in competitive achievement settings|journal=Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology|volume=29|issue=6|pages=668–700|doi=10.1521/jscp.2010.29.6.668}}</ref><ref name="Martinko 2011">{{cite journal|author1=Martinko, M.J.|author2=Harvey, P.|author3=Sikora, D.|author4=Douglas, S.C.|name-list-style=amp|year=2011|title=Perceptions of abusive supervision: The role of subordinates' attribution styles|journal=The Leadership Quarterly|volume=22|issue=4|pages=751–764|doi=10.1016/j.leaqua.2011.05.013}}</ref> Researchers have also used the theoretical framework of [[attribution (psychology)|attribution]]s and [[#attribution bias|attribution biases]] in order to modify the way people interpret social information. For example, studies have implemented [[#Academic achievement|attributional retraining]] to help students have more positive perceptions of their own academic abilities (see below for more details).<ref name="Perry 2010"/>

=== Mental health ===
Studies on attribution bias and mental health suggest that people who have mental illnesses are more likely to hold attribution biases.<ref name=":0">{{Cite journal|last1=Achim|first1=Amelie M.|last2=Sutliff|first2=Stephanie|last3=Samson|first3=Crystal|last4=Montreuil|first4=Tina C.|last5=Lecomte|first5=Tania|date=2016-02-23|title=Attribution bias and social anxiety in schizophrenia|journal=Schizophrenia Research: Cognition|volume=4|pages=1–3|doi=10.1016/j.scog.2016.01.001|issn=2215-0013|pmc=5506709|pmid=28740807}}</ref> People who have mental illness tend to have a lower self-esteem, experience social avoidance, and do not commit to improving their overall quality of life, often as a result of lack of motivation. People with these problems tend to feel strongly about their attribution biases and will quickly make their biases known. These problems are called social cognition biases and are even present in those with less severe mental problems. There are many kinds of cognitive biases that affect people in different ways, but all may lead to irrational thinking, judgment, and decision-making.<ref name=":1">{{Cite web|title=What are Cognitive Biases?|url=https://www.interaction-design.org/literature/topics/cognitive-biases|access-date=2019-08-03|website=The Interaction Design Foundation|language=en}}</ref>

===Aggression===
Extensive research in both [[Social psychology|social]] and [[developmental psychology]] has examined the relationship between aggressive behavior and attribution biases, with a specific focus on the [[Attribution bias#Hostile attribution bias|hostile attribution bias]].<ref name="Camodeca 2005" /><ref name="Steinberg and Dodge 1983" />

In particular, researchers have consistently found that children who exhibit a hostile attribution bias (tendency to perceive others' intent as hostile, as opposed to benign) are more likely to engage in aggressive behaviors.<ref name="Crick and Dodge 1996" /> More specifically, hostile attribution bias has been associated with reactive aggression, as opposed to proactive aggression, as well as [[victimization]]. Whereas proactive aggression is unprovoked and goal-driven, reactive aggression is an angry, retaliatory response to some sort of perceived provocation.<ref name="Crick and Dodge 1996" /> Therefore, children who are victims of aggression may develop views of peers as hostile, leading them to be more likely to engage in retaliatory (or reactive) aggression.<ref name="Schwartz 1998">{{cite journal|last1=Schwartz|first1=D.|display-authors=et al|year=1998|title=Social-cognitive and behavioral correlates of aggression and victimization in boys' play groups|journal=Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology|volume=26|issue=6|pages=431–440|doi=10.1023/A:1022695601088|pmid=9915650|s2cid=23832485}}</ref>

Research has also indicated that children can develop hostile attribution bias by engaging in aggression in the context of a video game.<ref name="Kirsh 1998">{{cite journal|last1=Kirsh|first1=S.J.|year=1998|title=Seeing the world through Mortal Kombat-colored glasses: Violent video games and the development of a short-term hostile attribution bias|journal=Childhood|volume=5|issue=2|pages=177–184|doi=10.1177/0907568298005002005|s2cid=143735522}}</ref> In a 1998 study, participants played either a  violent or non-violent video game and were then asked to read several hypothetical stories where a peer's intent was ambiguous. For example, participants may have read about their peer hitting someone in the head with a ball, but it was unclear whether or not the peer did this intentionally. Participants then responded to questions about their peer's intent. The children who played the violent video game were more likely to say that their peer harmed someone on purpose than the participants who played the nonviolent game. This finding provided evidence that exposure to violence and aggression could cause children to develop a short-term hostile attribution bias.

=== Intergroup relations ===
Research has found that humans often exhibit attribution biases when interpreting the behavior of others, and specifically when explaining the behavior of in-group versus out-group members. A review of the literature on intergroup attribution biases noted that people generally favor dispositional explanations of an in-group member's positive behavior and situational explanations for an in-group's negative behavior.<ref name="Hewstone 1990">{{cite journal|last1=Hewstone|first1=M|year=1990|title=The 'ultimate attribution error'? A review of the literature on intergroup causal attribution|journal=European Journal of Social Psychology|volume=20|issue=4|pages=311–335|doi=10.1002/ejsp.2420200404|s2cid=143771916}}</ref> Alternatively, people are more likely to do the opposite when explaining the behavior of an out-group member (i.e., attribute positive behavior to situational factors and negative behavior to disposition). Essentially, group members' attributions tend to favor the in-group. This finding has implications for understanding other social psychological topics, such as the development and persistence of out-group [[Stereotype|stereotypes]].<ref name="Hewstone 2002" />

Attribution biases in intergroup relations are observed as early as childhood. In particular, elementary school students are more likely to make dispositional attributions when their friends perform positive behaviors, but situational attributions when disliked peers perform positive behaviors. Similarly, children are more likely to attribute friends' negative behaviors to situational factors, whereas they attribute disliked peers' negative behaviors to dispositional factors.<ref name="Perry and Penner 1990">{{cite journal|last1=Perry|first1=R.P.|last2=Penner|first2=K.S.|year=1990|title=Enhancing academic achievement in college students through attributional retraining and instruction|journal=Journal of Educational Psychology|volume=82|issue=2|pages=262–271|doi=10.1037/0022-0663.82.2.262}}</ref> These findings provide evidence that attribution biases emerge very early on.

=== Academic achievement ===
Although certain attribution biases are associated with maladaptive behaviors, such as aggression, some research has also indicated that these biases are flexible and can be altered to produce positive outcomes. Much of this work falls within the domain of improving academic achievement through attributional retraining. For example, one study found that students who were taught to modify their attributions actually performed better on homework assignments and lecture materials.<ref name="Perry and Penner 1990" /> The retraining process specifically targeted students who tended to attribute poor academic performance to external factors. It taught these students that poor performance was often attributable to internal and unstable factors, such as effort and ability. Therefore, the retraining helped students perceive greater control over their own academic success by altering their attributional process.

More recent research has extended these findings and examined the value of attributional retraining for helping students adjust to an unfamiliar and competitive setting. In one study, first year college students went through attributional retraining following their first exam in a two-semester course.<ref name="Perry 2010" /> Similar to the previous study, they were taught to make more controllable attributions (e.g., "I can improve my test grade by studying more") and less uncontrollable attributions (e.g., "No matter what I do, I'll fail"). For students who performed low or average on their first exam, attributional retraining resulted in higher in-class test grades and GPA in the second semester. Students who performed well on the first exam were found to have more positive emotions in the second semester following attributional retraining. Taken together, these studies provide evidence for the flexibility and modifiability of attributional biases.