The fundamental attribution error - a life changing proposition

One of the most important things I learned in business school, two years ago during a social management and behavior class, is the fundamental attribution error, also called the correspondence bias or the attribution effect. The application of this theory in my life has made me a happier person.

The fundamental attribution error proposition was apparently thought of by social psychology professor Lee Ross (1977) after an experiment by Edward E. Jones and Victor Harris (1967). He called it the conceptual bedrock for the field of social psychology. Thus we can say he found it very important - and so do I.

When I was in my teenage years, I was quite confident in what I knew. I still remember telling my mother, that I judged myself to be pretty good at understanding why people do what they do. From then on, the older I got the less confident I became. Currently I find myself mind-blind, stumbling in the dark, finding myself resembling awfully close to the intelligence of a goat, and Jon Snow - who knows nothing.

Now what the heck is it? Let me try to explain…
When you have a certain interaction with another person, we have the tendency to attribute this person’s actions to his personal self, rather than external circumstances. Let’s just say that in most cases, for me around 80% of all cases, we tend to think that the actions of a person comes forth from his personality, rather than from outside factors. The fundamental attribution error argues that in reality it is the other way around.

Let me explain this by sharing a recent happening in which I made the error. When I fetched my daughter from daycare, I walked down the hallway to the front door which was just opened to another father who came to fetch his daughter. This big man, wearing a hat and a round sunglasses stood in front of the door opening, immovable with a cold exterior. I walked down the hallway with my daughter in my arms and greeted him. I registered no response whatsoever - his cold gaze continued looking down the hallway.

As foolish this might sound, this happening caused me to feel and think the following way - first of all I felt not acknowledged and respected, I felt like a little insignificant man. Further, these feelings let me to think this person is a prick. As I know the fundamental attribution error, I knew that I just made it. In reality it is most likely that his cold exterior countenance was due to external circumstances. Perhaps, this person was lost in his thoughts and did not hear me, or he greeted me with his eyes behind his shaded spectacles, or he just experienced a really bad day, or someone just made him feel like a little man, and so on. The correspondence bias tells us that most likely this person is actually not a prick.

So that’s basically what it is. If you’re still interested, let’s look at some of the implications...
Being aware of this particular error for two years now, I came to believe this error is one of the foundations of human miscommunication. On a personal level it can lead you to think that a lot of people around you are pricks, while they are not. On a national level it can lead in to society's thinking other societies are prick societies, while they are not. In reality, we actually have a lot more in common than we think. A good understanding of the fundamental attribution error therefore, could lead to world peace - there I said it! :p

In general, when you believe someone is a contemptible person or even an ‘evil’ person, rather than having a lot in common with yourself, you tend to restrain any further positive communication with that person. At first, you might ignore this person while feeding yourself confirmatory information supporting this person is bad. Going on, as no further communication has taken place which could liberate you from this distorted view of this person, you might actively condemn this person worsening your relationship with this person. This effect is most likely to be multiplied if this other person chooses to believe the same thing about you. There you go, a potential positive relationship to ruins by means of making the fundamental attribution error.

Sadly, you could suggest that if this happens on a personal level between one human being to another, this also takes place among nations. How many nations do you think to be prick nations, lazy nations, arrogant nations, self-serving raping donkey nations. The fundamental attribution error suggests, that most likely we are very much the same. We are no better, and no worse.

You could assert that from the beginning of humanity, we started making this error, increasing the distorted view of the other, making it worse to more worse. The accumulations of humanity’s undesirable actions against each other, would have today reached an enormous pile of guilt towards each other. Retribution after retribution does not balance the scale unfortunately, it only ads more guilt. Only forgiveness can remove guilt and a good understanding of the fundamental attribution error can prevent a person from adding more guilt.

References
Ross, L. (1977). "The intuitive psychologist and his shortcomings: Distortions in the attribution process". In Berkowitz, L. Advances in experimental social psychology 10. New York: Academic Press. pp. 173–220. ISBN 0-12-015210-X.

Jones, E. E.; Harris, V. A. (1967). "The attribution of attitudes". Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 3 (1): 1–24. doi:10.1016/0022-1031(67)90034-0.