Talk:Fundamental attribution error/Archives/2013

Correspondence bias and the fundamental attribution error are two different concepts
I was surprised to discover that Correspondence bias is a redirect and that it is described as another term for the fundamental attribution error (FAE). The FAE and correspondence bias are not one and the same. FAE is the underestimation of situational influences on behavior. By contrast, correspondence bias is to draw dispositional inferences from behavior although the behavior is influenced by situational factors. The FAE has been proposed as an explanation for correspondence bias. To quote a 2004 review article by Bertram Gawronski (p. 208, "Implications"):
 * "First, the present analyses provide further support for recent claims to consider the correspondence bias and the fundamental attribution error as two different phenomena (e.g., Hamilton, 1998; Krull, 2001)... the labels 'fundamental attribution error' and 'correspondence bias' are often used interchangeably to refer to one and the same phenomenon. In contrast to this rather widespread equation, however, some researchers argued that the correspondence bias should be considered as the tendency to draw correspondent dispositional inferences from situationally constrained behaviour, whereas the fundamental attribution error should be considered as the tendency to underestimate situational influences on human behaviour in terms of a causal theory... In other words, the correspondence bias and the fundamental attribution error seem to be two potentially related, but actually independent phenomena. Moreover, even though there is strong evidence for the correspondence bias, the available data offer no evidence for the assumption that the correspondence bias is due to the fundamental attribution error."

I think that we should rename the article "Correspondence bias" and mention the FAE in the Explanations section. --Sonicyouth86 (talk) 17:57, 4 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Also note that the explanations section may explain the correspondence bias but not the FAE. The just-world hypothesis and lack of effortful adjustment explain why people do not apply their knowledge of situational factors (e.g., because the want to believe that the world is just or they lack motivation or cognitive resources), not why people underestimate situational influences. --Sonicyouth86 (talk) 18:59, 4 April 2013 (UTC)