Perceived changes in trait attributions to others and the self

ABSTRACT

A study was conducted to examine the perceived changes in the impressions of others or self on 133 trait dimensions. Attributions to others were reportedly more negative over time whereas attributions to self were more positive over time. Perceived changes in others’ traits appear to be guided by basic behavioral inference processes. Trait beliefs about others tend to be revised when the traits are common and disconfirming behavior is infrequent and more diagnostic. Positive trait impressions of others change more frequently because they are more prevalent and because negative behaviors (that disconfirm positive attributions) are less frequent and more diagnostic than positive behaviors. In contrast, revisions of trait impressions of the self appear to be driven heavily by self-evaluation motivations such as the desire to see self-improvement. The favorableness of changes in trait self-concepts were positively correlated with self-esteem. The consequences of the observed patterns of attributional change for interpersonal relations are discussed.

KEYWORDS:

• Attribution
• correspondent behavior
• self-concept
• disconfirmation

Disclosure statement

We have no known conflict of interest to disclose.

Data availability statement

The data described in this article are openly available in the Open Science Framework at https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/FV56T.

Open scholarship

This article has earned the Center for Open Science badges for Open Data and Open Materials through Open Practices Disclosure. The data and materials are openly accessible at https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/FV56T.

Notes

1. Sanbonmatsu et al. (2015) misreported that the calculation of the normative ratings of the baserate frequency of trait consistent behavior, the expectation of trait consistent behavior by persons with the trait, and the other trait related judgments in their study began with the conversion of each participant’s judgments to standard scores. In actuality, the mean judgments across judges for each trait dimension were calculated first. These means were then converted to standard scores. Hence, the procedure used in determining the normative ratings in the present and Sanbonmatsu et al. (2015) studies differed from that of the Rothbart and Park (1987) study. However, it should be noted that the correlations between the ratings resulting from the two methods of calculation were extremely high.

Additional information

Funding

The author(s) reported there is no funding associated with the work featured in this article.

Notes on contributors

David M. Sanbonmatsu

David Sanbonmatsu is a Professor in the Department of Psychology, University of Utah. His research focuses on judgment and decision making, attitudes and attitude change, driving safety, and the science of science.

Taylor Adams

Taylor Adams was an Honors student at the University of Utah who collected portions of the reported data in her thesis study. She graduated with honors in 2018.

Paul H. White

Paul White is an Associate Professor in the Department of Psychology, University of Utah. His research interests include the role of non-message factors in attitudes & persuasion, impact of prejudice and stereotyping on performance, intergroup and intragroup relations, and group processes.