p class="p1" style="margin: 0px; font-variant-numeric: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; font-family: Arial;"Human actions and reactions are not arbitrarily caused. The reason is often not "just because," even if some give that as their reasoning. This paper will be about attitudes and as an example of such my example will be a former friend of mine Named Jenna./p
p class="p1" style="margin: 0px; font-variant-numeric: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; font-family: Arial;"Attitudes and actions are attributed to internal or external factors. Internal factors are factors that are caused or originate from a person or a self. For the most part these factors are controlable and stable. One can help these factors and replicate them or choose otherwise. external factors are factors which are beyond us and are factors that we usually do not cause. It is not something about a self. It is often uncontrolable, and one can not help it, thus it is unstable, which means one is not able to cause these things to happen or not happen again. Situations often causes us to act a certain way and react differently than we would otherwise react in another situation or position in the same situation. For example, concerning my former friend Jenna, an external factor that occurred was that her cousin Jennifer who she got along with extremely well moved to Ohio. This is a situational factor and if her uncle Mike did not decided to move his immediate family to Ohio Jenna may have acted differently. Our friendship perhaps might not have been so rocky. Jenna could not control this, whether her cousin Jennifer was going to ohio was not up to Jenna to decide, as it was mike's decision. an example of an internal factor is depression in Jenna's case. After Jennifer left California Jenna fell in to depression. This is an internal source and might been able to be controled. It's not an external situation, but something about Jenna. There are three factors to determining why a person is acting the way they are besides these to dimensions./p
p class="p1" style="margin: 0px; font-variant-numeric: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; font-family: Arial;"There are three factors to consider here, which makes up a model called the Co-variation model. consensus is when there are similarities between people, when they are faced with the same situation. The question is does everyone do what this other individual do? In Jenna's case, the question is, faced with depression, do others also become, bitter and nasty? another example that would work in terms of consensus would be do other people who has family members who are emotionally close that move away depressed? To answer the first question about whether if many depressed people are bitter and nasty, I think the answer is there is a good handful who are, whilst others may be more withdrawn. If there is high consensus such as in Jenna's case, then this would be somewhat situational. If it was lower in consensus, then this might point us in the direction of internal class="Apple-converted-space" /span/p
p class="p1" style="margin: 0px; font-variant-numeric: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; font-family: Arial;"besides consensus there is consistency. consistency asks if one always behaves in this manner. In Jenna's case, the question is during the entirety of her depression was she always nasty and bitter? The answer to this is, yes. Her bitterness, and nastiness continued. to become nastier. She became more withdrawn to me at least. Low consistency would signal that it was situational, and that a certain aspect of a situation may play a role in the behavior. Where as in Jenna's case, High consistency would hint at a internal or personal attribution./p
p class="p1" style="margin: 0px; font-variant-numeric: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; font-family: Arial;"Our third and last factor to consider is distinctiveness. This asks the question if whether people acts this way towards everyone or only towards a certain person. Is it consistent throughout many situations this person is involved in? Or is it only evident in certain situations? Unfortunately for me, Jenna for the most part was high in distinction, not so terrible for others, however. This is again a sign of situational factors. If the distinction is low then it's an internal and personal attribute. These three factors has been observed to form a few patterns./p
p class="p1" style="margin: 0px; font-variant-numeric: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; font-family: Arial;"What is happening here to jenna would be a mixture between situational and personal factors. for it only to be situational for Jenna it has to be high distinctiveness, low consistency, and high consensus. This is because if one only does this a few times and is not consistent with their behavior then it must be a certain thing to do with a situational factor. People are more willing at that point to attribute her behavior to simply bad luck. This is because all three conclusions are that the factors seem to be highly influenced by the situation. If it was purely internal attribution and this is caused because it is something specific to Jenna, it would have to be low concensus, high consistency, and low distinctive ness. If she's doing this to everyone and acting towards them the all the same, then we can safely conclude this is simply who she is. All of these factors indicates that it is due to a single person and, therefore we can conclude it's only them who has this problem. If she is the only one to act in such a way in such a condition such as depression, low consensus, then we can conclude that it is something about Jenna specifically that makes her act in this manner. All of this this is a rather logical, scientific, and systematic way to analyze others. Are we however always this logical and rational throughout our days in situations especially in fast reacting situations?/p
p class="p1" style="margin: 0px; font-variant-numeric: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; font-family: Arial;"We are rather likely to make errors in our judgements in situations and our initial judgement of a situation or attitude. the self-serving bias is a common one. One that I have made quite a few times myself. This is when one judges that one's problem is situational and more caused by others and one's position whilst the others attitudes or behavior is caused by something to do with the specific person and is attributed to mostly internal factors. An self-serving bias is when I was frustrated with Jenna because she often was bitter, brusk, and nasty towards me and blamed quite a number of my problems on personality flaws. I myself was going through issues myself with family, and identity as an immigrantspan class="Apple-converted-space" /spanand coming from a immigrant family. however, I myself blame Jenna's issue on her internal issues, which frankly caused issues however, if you examine, the above proof her situation was a large part of her problem as well. This is perhaps because while jenna and myself where able to assess our own situations, we are not able to exactly grasp the others situation, and thus hastily attribute it to the others personal and internal issues./p
p class="p1" style="margin: 0px; font-variant-numeric: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; font-family: Arial;"In conclusion, making judgements and analyzing the rationale behind how people act is more complex then we initially judged within the situation. In this essay I have used my friend Jenna as an example to explain attribution theories and what misjudgments we might/could make./p