Introduction to Psychology –

Practicum

Experiment Report

Name : Samir Karki

Stream : B. A
Level : Second Semester
Student ID : 2216126
Instructor : Ashish Kafle
 Kelly’s Covariation Theory of Attribution

Attribution can be defined as the process through which we seek to identify the
causes of others’ behavior and so gain knowledge of their stable traits and dispositions.
Weiner focused his attribution theory on achievement (Weiner, 1974). He identified
ability, effort, task difficulty, and luck as the most important factors affecting
attributions for achievement. Attributions are classified along three causal
dimensions: locus of control, stability, and controllability.

According to Kelley’s covariation theory, in our attempts to answer the question

“Why?” about others’ behavior, we focus on three major types of information. First, we
consider consensus—the extent to which other people react to a given stimulus or event
in the same manner as the person we are evaluating. The higher the proportion of people
who react in the same way, the higher is the consensus. Second, we consider
consistency—the extent to which the person in question reacts to the stimulus or event
in the same way on other occasions, over time. And third, we examine
distinctiveness—the extent to which the person reacts in the same manner to other,
different stimuli or events. We are most likely to attribute another’s behavior to internal
causes under conditions in which consensus and distinctiveness are low, but
consistency is high. In contrast, we are most likely to attribute another’s behavior to
external causes when consensus, consistency, and distinctiveness are all high. Finally,
we usually attribute another’s behavior to a combination of internal and external factors
when consensus is low, but consistency and distinctiveness are high.

Consensus: The extent to which other people react to some stimulus or event
in the same manner as the person we are considering.

Consistency: The extent to which an individual responds to a given stimulus

or situation in the same way on different occasions (i.e., across time)

Distinctiveness: The extent to which an individual responds in the same manner

to different stimuli or events
OBJECTIVE:

To study the covariation of the behavior of an actor (subject) upon a target person
(object).

METHOD

APPARATUS:

 Pen
 Note book

Subject and Object:

1. 22 Years Old Male - subject (general staff of CIMH)
2. 18 Years Old Female - object (a client of CIMH – very soon getting
discharged)

PROCEDURE:
To begin, the observer got ready with the apparatus in the observational settings.
The observation was conducted in Chaitanya Institute of Mental health (CIMH). Firstly,
the observer had a talk with a clinical psychologist in the rehabilitation center and got
consent to have an observation. The observer chose a behavior of the subject on his
aggression.

The object misplaced her water bottle i.e., placed in the area which was out of
boundaries of the organizational rules. After a few minutes, the subject went towards
the object and his microseconds of expression i.e., micro-expression of aggression was
clearly seen along with higher pitch of voice towards the object. The observer noted it
down in the diary. Then, when the situation quickly cooled down, the observer went to
the object to have a conversation. The observer told her everything about the behavior
observation, “I have been observing you and the staff since the past ten minutes. This
is because I’m to prepare a report on the reason of the staff’s aggression towards you.
Are you comfortable sharing your genuine answers to my questions?” In this way the
consent was verified.

- The first question for the consensus was: Does the staff only show aggression
towards you or others do as well?
- The second question for the consistency was: Is he usually angry towards you?
- The third and last question was for the distinctiveness: Is he only angry towards
you or others too?

The answers were:

1. No, I often get scolded from others too.

2. Yes, even in minor things.
3. He has scolded many people here in the organization.

The observer went back to the psychologist in order to verify the object’s response. The
psychologist being regular observer validated the response.

INTROSPECTIVE REPORT:

Subjective Introspection: I was surprised by later knowing that I was being watched. I
feel like should not have shown the anger. Well, that was interesting though.

Objective Introspection: I found it interesting that the behaviors can be studied in this
way. Now, I’m more interested to psychology. Thank you.
 RESULTS

Consensus Consistency Distinctiveness

Rate High High Low

As the object is often scolded by even the people other than the subject, the
consensus is high. Likewise, the consistency is also high because the actor usually
shows the same behavior towards the object. And due to the reason that the staff is
angry towards others too, the distinctiveness is low.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

When it comes to consensus being high, it looks like the reason of the behavior is
external i.e., the object might have been usually misplacing her water bottle. Moreover,
the consistent aggression of the subject towards object supports the result of the
consensus i.e., covariation might be external. However, the lower result of
distinctiveness predicts the behavior of the subject is internal. This might lead to the
conclusion that the subject has anger issue. Therefore, the obtained result cannot
provide an explicit reason as internal, external or even both.

REFERENCES:

- Nyla R. Branscombe and Robert A. Baron. (2017). Social

Psychology, 15th Edition, United States edition.: Pearson Education.

- Heider, F. (1958). The Psychology of Interpersonal

Relations. New York: Wiley.

