Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

CiteULike is a free service for managing and discovering scholarly references - click here to get started.

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Strube, M. J
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Strube, M. J
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Performance Attributions and the Type a Behavior Pattern

Causal Sources Versus Causal Dimensions

Michael J Strube

Washington University

Past research has produced conflicting results concerning the manner in which Type As and Bs make attributions following success and failure. Some studies find that Type As are more likely than Type Bs to blame themselves for all outcomes, particularly failure. Other research indicates that Type As are more self-serving in their postperformance attributions. Research indicating more self-blame by Type As typically uses a causal source approach, that is, subjects are asked to indicate the extent to which common causal sources (e.g., ability, effort) produced the outcome. The causal-dimension approach, used in studies that find Type As to be more self-serving than Type Bs, assesses the dimensional structure of causes directly. One possible explanation for the divergence in results is that Type As and Bs differ in their interpretations of the dimensional structure underlying common causal sources, with Type As interpreting those causes in a more self-servingc manner. Results provided support for this hypothesis: Following success and failure, Type As interpretations of the dimensional structure of ability and effort differedfrom those of Type Bs in ways that were more self-serving.

Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, Vol. 14, No. 4, 709-721 (1988)
DOI: 10.1177/0146167288144006


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?