Theories of social cognition

this presentation is for the students of psychology

1. Theories of social cognition By: Amrina abid

2. Kelley’s covariation model: theory no 1. I ntroduction: Kelley’s theory is best known attribution theory. Covariation Model  is an attribution  theory  in which a person tries to explain others' or her certain behavior through multiple observations. It deals with both  social  perception and self-perception of the person. It was proposed by Harold  Kelley. It states: An effect is attributed to the one of its possible causes with which , overtime, it covaries . The term covariation simple means that a person has multiple observation at different time and different situation. It states It states

3. Main idea: He developed a logical model for judging whether a particular action should be attributes external or internal. The term covariation simple means that a person has multiple observation at different time and different situation. He argues that in trying to discover the cause of behavior people act like scientist. More specifically they take into account three evidences

4. Evidences: ​ Consensus: . I t refers to the extent to which people behave in similar ways in similar situations.  For instance , Alison smokes a cigarette when she goes out for a meal with her friends. If her friends smoke her behavior is high in consensus. If Alison only smokes her behavior is low in consensus. Distinctiveness It refers to uniqueness of the behavior in any particular situation. The distinctiveness is low if person behaves in the similar manner in all situations and vice versa .   For instance , If Alison only smokes when she goes outside, distinctiveness of her behavior is high. Likewise, distinctiveness of her behavior is low if she constantly smokes regardless of the time or place.

5. Evidences: Consistency: The covariation of the behavior across time is regarded as consistency. In other words, it refers to the extent in which a person behaves in a certain manner every time.  For instance , If Alison needs to smoke every time she goes out to eat, consistency is high. Likewise, if she only smoke when she is out with friends (denoting one special occasion), consistency is low .

6. Conclusion of the theory In simple words, a person’s certain behavior is credited to possible causes always seen at the same time. This provides the observer opportunity to observe those causes (attributions)  correlating  it to the effect seen on the person. In the examples mentioned above, our subject is  Alison. Her behavior is smoking. Her behavior is thus manipulated to explain the evidences in thorough detail. In simple terms, when we see that two things go hand in hand, it’s safe to assume that one thing causes the other.

7. John and davis correspondence theory theory no 2. Introduction Correspondent  inference  theory  is a psychological  theory  proposed by Edward E. Jones and Keith E.  Davis  (1965) that "systematically accounts for a perceiver's inferences about what an actor was trying to achieve by a particular action ". John and D avis thought that people pay particular attention to intentional behavior. A correspondent inference, sometimes also called a correspondent trait inference, is a judgment that a person’s personality matches or corresponds to his or her behavior . The major purpose of this theory is to try and explain why people make internal or external attributions.

8. Main idea: John and Davis theory help us to understand the process of making internal attribution. This theory states that we tend to do this when we make correspondence between motive and behavior. Dispositional ( internal ) attribution provide us with information fro which we can make predictions about a person’s behavior. For example:  For example, if we notice that Taliyah is behaving in a friendly manner and we infer that she has a friendly personality, we have made, or drawn, a correspondent inference. Or, if we notice that Carl is behaving in an aggressive manner and we conclude that he is an aggressive sort of person, we have drawn a correspondent inference.

9. Sources of information John and Davis theory draws behavior on sources of information Choice : A behavior is freely chosen it is believed to be due to internal factors. Example : John is tasked to debate in favor of Capitalism. It would be unfair in part of the audience/perceiver to judge John as a capitalist. However, if John had chosen to argue in favor of Capitalism instead of, say – democracy, it would be agreeable to infer that John’s statements reflect his true beliefs. Accidental vs intentional behavior: behavior is likely to be attributed: Behavior is likely to be attributed to person’s personality is intentional behavior and behavior that is likely to be attributed to any situation called accidental behavior.

10. Sources of information Social Desirability Behavior low in social desirability lead us to make dispositional inferences. Rather than social desirability, lack of it is seen to be more fruitful when it comes to inferring a person’s internal attributes. This is mainly because people are more likely to behave in a socially desired way. For example : A person getting on a bus and sitting on a floor instead of one of the seats. Hedonistic relevance: The tendency to attribute a behavior to the actor’s dispositional rather than the situations is called hedonistic relevance, even if the situation is completely out of control of the actor. For example: Alison trips and spills her beer on marry’s carpet. marry holds alison responsible rather than taking into account that the carpet was uneven .

11. Sources of information Personalism : When a person’s behavior impacts us, we automatically assume that the behavior was intended and personal, even if it was simply a by-product of the situation we are both in. Example :  Jack and John are walking on the mountains, and they only have few drops of water left. Out of thirst Jack drinks when John’s not looking. John automatically assumes that Jack wanted to deprive him of the last few drops of water, ignoring the fact that it was the situation which forced Jack into performing such action .

12. Conclusion of the theory Internal or Dispositional attribution is more focused in this theory. In fact, situational or external causes of any actions are not dealt here . The correspondent inference theory helps us properly understand the internal attribution. Internal attribution is easily understandable because of the correspondence we see between motive and behavior.