Apply the attribution theories to a given scenario. (1000-1200 words)

For this essay, consider two attribution theories and analyse the constructs of each theory. Apply the key constructs of the theories to the vignette, and analyse how the theory may explain what occurred.

Vignette: Molly, 62-year-old Caucasian American Female

Molly exited her doctor’s office and promptly lit a cigarette. In doing so, she missed her bus and would have to wait an additional 30 minutes for the next one. She thought about Dr. Wilson, her primary care physician, who was not too concerned about her smoking. Then, she thought about Dr. Smith, her cardiologist, who had clearly stated that she needs to stop smoking. Waiting for the next bus was no problem for Molly; she could enjoy a second cigarette.

• • Select two theories from the three theories
    • Heider’s naive psychology theory
    • Jones and Vavis’ correspondent inference theory
    • Kelly’s covariation model
• Provide a brief analysis of the two theories you selected.
• Explain how the key constructs of each theory can be applied to the vignette.
• Explain how each theory might explain what causes the situation in the vignette.
• As you complete your academic comparison, elaborate on the vignette, including how the person might behave if he or she was in a different situation or setting.
• Provide examples to support your response.

  Total words: 1000-1200 words

  ?Learning Resources

  Readings

  • Article: Iatridis, T., & Fousiani, K. (2009). Effects of status and outcome on attributions and just-world beliefs: How the social distribution of success and failure may be rationalized. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 45(2), 415–420. Retrieved from the Walden Library using the PsycINFO database
  • Book Excerpt: Moskowitz, G. B. (2005a). Attribution . In Social cognition: Understanding self and others (pp. 233–266). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
    Moskowitz, G.B. (2005). Social Cognition: Understanding Self and Others. New York, NY: Guilford Publications, Inc. Reprinted by permission.
  • Book Excerpt: Moskowitz, G. B. (2005b). Correspondence bias and spontaneous trait inferences . In Social cognition: Understanding self and others (pp. 267–309). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
    Moskowitz, G.B. (2005). Social Cognition: Understanding Self and Others. New York, NY: Guilford Publications, Inc. Reprinted by permission.
  • Book Excerpt: Moskowitz, G. B. (2005d). Shortcomings and biases in person perception . In Social cognition: Understanding self and others(pp. 310-352). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
    Moskowitz, G.B. (2005). Social Cognition: Understanding Self and Others. New York, NY: Guilford Publications, Inc. Reprinted by permission.
  • Article: Switzer, B., & Boysen, G. A. (2009). The impact of religiosity and attribution theory on attitudes toward addiction and cancer. Mental Health, Religion, & Culture, 12(3), 241–245. Retrieved from the Walden Library using the PsycINFO database

  Websites

  • Social Psychology Network. (2011). Retrieved fromhttp://www.socialpsychology.org

  Optional Resources

  • Article: Gilbert, D. T., & Malone, P. S. (1995). The correspondence bias.Psychological Bulletin, 117(1), 21–38.
  • Article: Weiner, B. (2008). Reflections on the history of attribution theory and research: People, personalities, publications, problems. Social Psychology 39(3), 151–156.