Causal attributions for success or failure by passing and failing students in College Algebra

Success in mathematics has been identified as a predictor of baccalaureate degree completion. Within the coursework of college mathematics, College Algebra has been identified as a high-risk course due to its low success rates. ^ Research in the field of attribution theory and academic achievement suggests a relationship between a student's attributional style and achievement. Theorists and researchers contend that attributions influence individual reactions to success and failure. They also report that individuals use attributions to explain and justify their performance. Studies in mathematics education identify attribution theory as the theoretical orientation most suited to explain academic performance in mathematics. This study focused on the relationship among a high risk course, low success rates, and attribution by examining the difference in the attributions passing and failing students gave for their performance in College Algebra. ^ The methods for the study included a pilot administration of the Causal Dimension Scale (CDSII) which was used to conduct reliability and principal component analyses. Then, students (n = 410) self-reported their performance on an in-class test and attributed their performance along the dimensions of locus of causality, stability, personal controllability, and external controllability. They also provided open-ended attribution statements to explain the cause of their performance. The quantitative data compared the passing and failing groups and their attributions for performance on a test using One-Way ANOVA and Pearson chi square procedures. The open-ended attribution statements were coded in relation to ability, effort, task difficulty, and luck and compared using a Pearson chi square procedure. ^ The results of the quantitative data comparing passing and failing groups and their attributions along the dimensions measured by the CDSII indicated statistical significance in locus of causality, stability, and personal controllability. The results comparing the open-ended attribution statements indicated statistical significance in the categories of effort and task difficulty. ^

Examining moderators of the hindsight bias in the context of civil legal decision -making: Counterfactuals, causal proximity, and self -referencing

The current research sought to clarify the diverging relationships between counterfactual thinking and hindsight bias observed in the literature thus far. In a non-legal context, Roese and Olson (1996) found a positive relationship between counterfactuals and hindsight bias, such that counterfactual mutations that undid the outcome also increased participants’ ratings of the outcome’s a priori likelihood. Further, they determined that this relationship is mediated by causal attributions about the counterfactually mutated antecedent event. Conversely, in the context of a civil lawsuit, Robbennolt and Sobus (1997) found that the relationship between counterfactual thinking and hindsight bias is negative. The current research sought to resolve the conflicting findings in the literature within a legal context. ^ In Experiment One, the manipulation of the normality of the defendant’s target behavior, designed to manipulate participants’ counterfactual thoughts about said behavior, did moderate the hindsight effect of outcome knowledge on mock jurors’ judgments of the foreseeability of that outcome as well as their negligence verdicts. Although I predicted that counterfactual thinking would increase, or exacerbate, the hindsight bias, as found by Roese and Olson (1996), my results provided some support for Robbenolt and Sobus’s (1997) finding that counterfactual thinking decreases the hindsight bias. Behavior normality did not moderate the hindsight effect of outcome knowledge in Experiment Two, nor did causal proximity in Experiment Three. ^ Additionally, my hypothesis that self-referencing may be an effective hindsight debiasing technique received little support across the three experiments. Although both the self-referencing instructions and self-report measure consistently decreased mock jurors’ likelihood of finding the defendant negligent, and self-referencing instructions decreased their foreseeability ratings in studies two and three, the self-referencing manipulation did not interact with outcome knowledge to moderate a hindsight bias effect on either foreseeability or negligence judgments. The consistent pattern of results across the three experiments, however, suggests that self-referencing may be an effective technique in reducing the likelihood of negligence verdicts.^

Examining Moderators of the Hindsight Bias in the Context of Civil Legal Decision-Making: Counterfactuals, Causal Proximity, and Self-Referencing

The current research sought to clarify the diverging relationships between counterfactual thinking and hindsight bias observed in the literature thus far. In a non-legal context, Roese and Olson (1996) found a positive relationship between counterfactuals and hindsight bias, such that counterfactual mutations that undid the outcome also increased participants’ ratings of the outcome’s a priori likelihood. Further, they determined that this relationship is mediated by causal attributions about the counterfactually mutated antecedent event. Conversely, in the context of a civil lawsuit, Robbennolt and Sobus (1997) found that the relationship between counterfactual thinking and hindsight bias is negative. The current research sought to resolve the conflicting findings in the literature within a legal context. In Experiment One, the manipulation of the normality of the defendant’s target behavior, designed to manipulate participants’ counterfactual thoughts about said behavior, did moderate the hindsight effect of outcome knowledge on mock jurors’ judgments of the foreseeability of that outcome as well as their negligence verdicts. Although I predicted that counterfactual thinking would increase, or exacerbate, the hindsight bias, as found by Roese and Olson (1996), my results provided some support for Robbenolt and Sobus’s (1997) finding that counterfactual thinking decreases the hindsight bias. Behavior normality did not moderate the hindsight effect of outcome knowledge in Experiment Two, nor did causal proximity in Experiment Three. Additionally, my hypothesis that self-referencing may be an effective hindsight debiasing technique received little support across the three experiments. Although both the self-referencing instructions and self-report measure consistently decreased mock jurors’ likelihood of finding the defendant negligent, and self-referencing instructions decreased their foreseeability ratings in studies two and three, the self-referencing manipulation did not interact with outcome knowledge to moderate a hindsight bias effect on either foreseeability or negligence judgments. The consistent pattern of results across the three experiments, however, suggests that self-referencing may be an effective technique in reducing the likelihood of negligence verdicts.

The role of individualism and collectivism as predictors of attributions for unethical work behavior: An empirical examination across two culturally diverse groups

This dissertation addresses how the cultural dimensions of individualism and collectivism affect the attributions people make for unethical behavior at work. The moderating effect of ethnicity is also examined by considering two culturally diverse groups: Hispanics and Anglos. The sample for this study is a group of business graduate students from two universities in the Southeast. A 20-minute survey was distributed to master's degree students at their classroom and later on returned to the researcher. Individualism and collectivism were operationalized as by a set of attitude items, while unethical work behavior was introduced in the form of hypothetical descriptions or scenarios. Data analysis employed multiple group confirmatory factor analysis for both independent and dependent variables, and subsequently multiple group LISREL models, in order to test predictions. Results confirmed the expected link between cultural variables and attribution responses, although the role of independent variables shifted, due to the moderating effect of ethnicity, and to the nuances of each particular situation. ^

The role of attitudes, subjective norms, attributions, and individualism-collectivism in managers' responses to bribery in organizations: The case of Ecuador

The goal of this study was twofold: (1) to introduce a model explaining how attitudes, subjective norms, internal and external attributions about bribery affect the way managers' deal with bribery in organizations, and (2) to clarify the role of the individualism-collectivism cultural dimension in managers' attributions of employees' behavior related to bribery. Twenty-six internal and external attributions related to bribery were identified through a series of structural interviews with 65 subject matter experts, and then evaluated by three hundred fifty-four (n = 354) Ecuadorian managers. Hierarchical regression analyses indicated that attitudes and external attributions significantly predicted managers' intentions to discipline employees' who accepted a bribe, and that those with a collectivist orientation were more likely to make external attributions of bribery. Implications for the eradication of bribery in organizations are discussed. ^

The role of individualism and collectivism as predictors of attributions for unethical work behavior : an empirical examination across two culturally diverse groups

This dissertation addresses how the cultural dimensions of individualism and collectivism affect the attributions people make for unethical behavior at work. The moderating effect of ethnicity is also examined by considering two culturally diverse groups: Hispanics and Anglos. The sample for this study is a group of business graduate students from two universities in the Southeast. A 20-minute survey was distributed to master's degree students at their classroom and later on returned to the researcher. Individualism and collectivism were operationalized as by a set of attitude items, while unethical work behavior was introduced in the form of hypothetical descriptions or scenarios. Data analysis employed multiple group confirmatory factor analysis for both independent and dependent variables, and subsequently multiple group LISREL models, in order to test predictions. Results confirmed the expected link between cultural variables and attribution responses, although the role of independent variables shifted, due to the moderating effect of ethnicity, and to the nuances of each particular situation.

Attributions and the Evaluation of Dynamic Performance

As research into the dynamic characteristics of job performance across time has continued to accumulate, associated implications for performance appraisal have become evident. At present, several studies have demonstrated that systematic trends in job performance across time influence how performance is ultimately judged. However, little research has considered the processes by which the performance trend-performance rating relationship occurs. In the present study, I addressed this gap. Specifically, drawing on attribution theory, I proposed and tested a model whereby the performance trend-performance rating relationship occurs through attributions to ability and effort. The results of this study indicated that attributions to ability, but not effort, mediate the relationship between performance trend and performance ratings and that this relationship depends on attribution-related cues. Implications for performance appraisal research and theory are discussed.