Download LIBR 220 Assignment 4 : Communication Theories

Cheng, Hernandez, Yang
LIBR 220 Fall 2012
Assignment 4
Communication Theories
Social Learning Theory,
Theory of Reasoned Action / Planned Behavior
and Attribution Theory
Introduction
Communication theory studies the technical process of information and the human
process of human communication. Various types of communication theories not limited to this
1
Cheng, Hernandez, Yang
LIBR 220 Fall 2012
Assignment 4
list are Attribution Theory, Theory of Reasoned Action, Theory of Planned Behavior, and Social
Learning Theory. Anna Yang will be discussing Social Learning Theory, Claire Cheng will be
discussing both Theory of Reasoned Action and Theory of Planned Behavior, and finally,
Ernesto Hernandez will be discussing Attribution Theory. The paper will flow in this order with
each team member’s comparison at the end of their section.
Social Learning Theory: A Concept
Albert Bandura, a renowned psychologist at Stanford University, states that behavior is
learned from the environment through the process of modeling and observational learning. He
proposes that individuals are influenced by watching what others do, and are also influenced by
the outcome. Three core concepts of Bandura’s social learning theory are observation, mental
state (intrinsic state), and understanding that learning does not lead to change in behavior.
Observational learning dictates that individuals learn by observing other people. A
famous example is the Bobo doll experiment in which an adult acted violently toward the doll.
A group of children was observing the adult and when they were later allowed to play with the
doll, they imitated the same actions (Bandura, Ross, Ross, 1961, p. 575). Bandura also stresses
the importance of an individual’s mental state. He defines it as intrinsic reinforcement, where a
form of internal reward such as pride, satisfaction, and a sense of accomplishment are connected
to internal thoughts and cognitions. This leads to his next point, which is that learning does not
lead to change in behavior. Observational learning only demonstrates that individuals can learn
new information and behavior by watching others, but it doesn’t mean they will acquire new
behaviors.
2
Cheng, Hernandez, Yang
LIBR 220 Fall 2012
Assignment 4
Fig. 1 Albert Bandura’s Social Learning Theory depicts the various concepts and stages that an individual will arrive at when
conducting observational learning.
Basic Model of Observational Learning
The three basic models of observational learning are live model, verbal instructional
model and symbolic model. The live model involves an actual individual demonstrating the
behavior. The verbal instructional model is when that individual describes behavior to another
individual. The symbolic model occurs when a real or fictional character demonstrates a
behavior by means of the media, including but not limited to movies, television, and literature
(Bandura, Grusec, Menlove, 1966, p. 499-501). We have all been subject to these types of
models throughout our lives. For example, children rely on their family members as models to
establish certain behaviors such as masculinity, femininity, and even language development.
The person who is being observed is known as the model. Whether the model knows it
or not, they are being observed by others around them. As a matter of fact, Bandura emphasizes
that an individual’s behavior is influenced by the environment and personal qualities. They all
3
Cheng, Hernandez, Yang
LIBR 220 Fall 2012
Assignment 4
reciprocally influence each other, which is why he proposed that there are several steps involved
in the modeling process. The first is attention process, which “determine what people selectively
observe in the profusion of modeling influence and what information they extract from ongoing
modeled activities” (Wood and Bandura, 1989, p. 362). In order to actually learn, that individual
must be actively observing and paying attention to what is happening. Distractions can cause an
individual to experience unclear observational learning, which would mean they have not
observed effectively. If the modeling is done in a novel situation, the individual observing the
model will more likely be intrigued and his/her attention may not shift.
The second process is retention, which “involves an active process of transforming and
restructuring information about events in the form of rules and conceptions” (Wood and
Bandura, 1989, p. 362). When pairing retention with representational process, an individual is
symbolically transforming the information into memory, which can be mentally rehearsed for
later usage. The third process is reproduction. It states that “symbolic conceptions are translated
into appropriate courses of action (Wood and Bandura, 1989, p. 362). Once an individual has
accomplished attention and retention, it is time for them to act out the behavior in order for them
to modify it to achieve a closer correspondence between their conceptions and their action.
Last but not least is motivation. As human beings, we need motivation to do undesirable
things. Wood and Bandura (1989) explain that “people are most likely to adopt modeled
strategies if the strategies produce valued outcomes, rather than unrewarding or punishing
effects” (p. 363). We adopt behaviors if we find the outcome to be rewarding, and we most
likely will not adopt the behavior if there is a punishment. People are motivated by the success
of others but will shy away from people’s failures, especially if we are using them as a model for
ourselves. Take for instance, student A wants to reserve a group study room for himself. He is
4
Cheng, Hernandez, Yang
LIBR 220 Fall 2012
Assignment 4
standing in line at the circulation counter and in front of him is student B who is in the process of
trying to reserve a room. He observes the other student talking to the library staff, who tells him
that he can’t reserve a group study room solely for himself, but that there are individual smaller
study rooms that he can go use if they are unoccupied. Student B then explains that the
individual study groups do not have outlet plugs so he would like to reserve the group study
rooms that do come with outlets. The staff then continues to tell him that if within the hour, if no
one has requested for the group study rooms, then they will make an exception. Student B says
that he will be back in an hour. Student A would have heard this and instead of asking the same
question, he/she will probably do one of the following: ask the librarian where he/she can go to
have a quiet space for studying that involves an outlet or, he may even go to student B and see if
they want to just share the group study room together. The point here is that the outcome does
affect how we behave or perceive situations. We are motivated by success and shy away from
failure.
The Patron
Applying Bandura’s Social Learning theory to students in an academic library can be set
in many examples. The majority and sometimes the only users of academic libraries will be
college students. One thing to keep in mind is that not all college students are in the library to
study. Some are there to just hang out or sleep. Although that’s far from what the original
purpose of a library was meant for, often times, we do see that occurring. But why is that this is
suddenly becoming the norm? Well, it’s a learned behavior. As I explained previously, we
observe others and learn from their success/mistakes and transform it into our own behaviors.
Let me set up a couple scenarios that would meet each observational model.
5
Cheng, Hernandez, Yang
LIBR 220 Fall 2012
Assignment 4
An example of live model is where two students A and B are studying in the library.
Student A wants to print a picture in color for her assignment. She prints it from her personal
laptop and goes to retrieve the picture from the circulation desk. When she gets it, she finds that
it’s in black and white. She tries to reprint the picture by changing the options on her laptop.
She makes all the changes and reprints the picture, only to find out that it’s still coming out in
black and white. She asks a staff at the circulation desk why the picture isn’t coming out in
color, and the staff then relays to her that their wireless printer only prints black and white
copies. That if she wanted color copies, she would have to go down to the bottom floor and
connect her laptop to the color copier to get her desired pictures. Student A goes downstairs and
gets her color picture. Student A has automatically become a live model for student B. Most
likely, in the future, if student B needed to print a color picture, she will just go downstairs to
print it versus trying to print it through the wireless printer.
A very popular and sometimes most frequent model of observational learning is the
verbal instruction. We believe what we are told, especially if someone is trying to explain to us
their side of the story. Going back to my recent comment about how students have been using
the library to socialize and at times, sleep. Student A goes to student B and tells her to meet up
at the library and they can just hang out there. Student B, a new freshman, is confused. Her
usual experiences in a library usually centered on studying and homework. She is a bit hesitant
and asks student A if that is even allowed. Student A then goes into details about how the library
lets students talk and socialize in certain parts of the library. They could even bring food in, and
talk on their cell phones. Verbal instruction allows the individual to actually reconstruct the
information and reproduce the behavior to see what the outcome will be. Student B decides to
follow student A into the library and they open up some bags of food and hang out at the tables
6
Cheng, Hernandez, Yang
LIBR 220 Fall 2012
Assignment 4
while they wait for class to start. A staff doesn’t come to shush them or tell them to put their
food away. This reinforces the behavior, which means that student B will most likely reenact
this in the future.
Whenever I think of symbolic observation, I think of how the media portrays the library
through their eyes. It can at times be very twisted and at times, very truthful. An example I’d
like to paint is using the Friends episode The One with Ross’s Library Book. The plot of this
episode was that Ross’s book was in the section of the library where no one would go, so
students would go there and make out. I’m using this as an example because not only does this
depict Ross being completely outrageous, it later shows him actually making out with another
student among the stacks. I personally went to our library and wanted to go find out if such spots
actually existed. And sure enough, as I’m browsing pass the dusty Economics section in the
basement, I come across two individuals who quickly jolt apart and act as if a 1985 California
Economics book is interesting. I quickly excuse myself and walk, away half giggling.
Although, I did not reenact that behavior, I learned about it through the media and it was later
solidify in real life down in the Economics department.
The Information Professional
For an information professional, you have to constantly reevaluate and learn from your
surroundings and your experiences. Other information professionals become models for you,
especially if you are new within the field. As stated before, Bandura’s four steps to modeling are
attention, retention, reproduction, and motivation. By paying attention to the model, you’ll be
able to retain the information. Once the information is locked in, the next step is having the
ability to reproduce the same behaviors. It’s not necessarily “monkey-see, monkey-do”. The
7
Cheng, Hernandez, Yang
LIBR 220 Fall 2012
Assignment 4
individual will have to recreate that behavior to better suit their own personalities. That brings
us to motivation, a key factor in Bandura’s social learning theory.
Reinforcements can be good or bad. Krohn (1999) explained that “for social learning
theory, the process consists primarily of instrumental learning that occurs either directly through
rewards and punishments for behavior, or vicariously by imitation or the observation of the
behavior and the consequences that the behavior has for others” (p. 464). For example, there are
three reference librarians at the desk, one head of reference and two regular reference librarians.
A student comes into the library and asks reference librarian 1 about finding materials for a
paper. Reference librarian 1 is about to go on break so she browses around for a bit and says
there’s very little on the topic and that she should just use the internet for her research. The
student leaves and the head reference librarian at the counter tell her she can go on her lunch
break. The head reference librarian just reinforced librarian 1’s behavior, which librarian 2 saw.
This means that the next time, if librarian 2 wanted to quickly go on her lunch break and she was
with a student, she could just tell that student to go look online. There wouldn’t be a
punishment, not from what she had just observed.
There’s more to rewarding a behavior then just saying “good job”. Reinforcement can be
external and internal, as well as positive and negative. If the external reinforcement doesn’t
match with an individual’s internal reinforcement, then the motivation doesn’t exist. Consider
what Bandura (1977) says here: “Depending upon the activities involved and the way in which
rewards are used, extrinsic incentives can increase interest in activities, reduce interest, or have
no effect” (p. 107). Not only does this illustrates that human behavior is incredibly complex, it
also proves the point that we are motivated by different things. An information professional can
simply be happy just by making sure their patrons’ needs are met, while others may need
8
Cheng, Hernandez, Yang
LIBR 220 Fall 2012
Assignment 4
materialistic motivation (e.g. Employee of the Month, bonuses, wage increase, verbal
recognition, etc…). As information professionals, we have to find out what motivates us to be a
better model for others, as well as adopting those observed behaviors, values, beliefs and
attitudes of others who have been rewarded (positively).
Social Learning Theory vs. Attribution Theory
An important thing to note is that attribution theory focuses on how an individual
explains and draws inferences from their observation in order to explain behavior, while the
social learning theory focuses on the actual process of observing. Three things I found
interesting about the attribution theory were consensus, consistency, and distinctiveness. These
are the three key variables required in order for an individual to understand another individual’s
actions and behavior. However, as my colleague will mentioned, there is little research applied to
the information science field concerning both social learning and attribution theory.
Attribution theory attempts to look at the behaviors of people and tries to explain why
people behave the way they do. Social learning theory doesn’t attempt to explain behaviors of
people. Rather it is an observation of the behavior, retention of the information gathered from
the behavior, a recreation of the behavior (if desirable), and later, finds motivation to implement
the observed behavior. There is a series of steps the observer must follow while attribution
requires three key variables to understand behavior, which was already mentioned. There is an
emphasis on how our causal attributions underlie our true behavior, which also argues the
importance of understanding the cause of that behavior. Although both address different aspects
of communication, they both deal with human behavior, just on different levels.
9
Cheng, Hernandez, Yang
LIBR 220 Fall 2012
Assignment 4
Attribution theory proposes three biases; fundamental attribution error, the actor-observer
bias, and self-serving bias. Fundamental attribution is when an individual over attributes the
behavior of others to internal factors. The actor-observer bias attributes an individual’s behavior
to external factors. The self-serving bias is when an individual is motivated only to maintain
their own self-esteem. Although the social learning theory doesn’t propose a bias, the selfserving bias can be applied to an individual, since motivation is an important factor to
observational learning. If an individual chooses not to learn a behavior because of their own
self-serving bias, that can change the outcome of a behavior. Even so, both theories aren’t based
on the same process, but they do correlate with each other.
In conclusion, social learning theory leads directly to attribution theory. Because social
learning theory is only limited to observation and not the evaluation of the model’s purpose,
attribution theory can be used to explain the causes of that behavior. We learn by observing
others and we understand by evaluating their actions. If we are able to retain and understand
certain situations and behaviors, we can better prepare for future outcomes. By combining these
two theories of human behavior, we can provide a theoretical framework of concepts to better
understand human communication, which is governed by behavior.
Theory of Reasoned Action (TRA)
The theory of reasoned action presents a model for predicting human behavior. The
model shows that any given behavior is a direct result of our behavioral intention, which is our
cognitive preparedness to perform a behavior. Our behavioral intention is a byproduct of
internal and external forces. On one hand, our intention to perform a behavior is a function of
our individual attitude about the behavior; how we evaluate the outcome or consequence of our
10
Cheng, Hernandez, Yang
LIBR 220 Fall 2012
Assignment 4
behavior and what our beliefs say about whether the behavior will produce positive or negative
results based on foreseen consequences. On the other hand, social forces inform our actions.
The normative beliefs of society, or the socially defined rules of behavior, shape our perception
of the level of social acceptance and importance of our behavior. More specifically, the given
opinion of a significant other can influence our decision-making and has the ability to persuade
us to comply with that significant other’s opinion or advice. Our concept of these subjective
norms is a composite of our perception of our significant others’ acceptance level of a particular
behavior as well as our personal motivation to meet that standard of behavior. The theory states
that the convergence of these two forces, our personal attitudes and social attitudes, dictate our
behavioral intention which ultimately predicts the performance of a given behavior. In other
words, our behavioral intention is a strong predictor of our behavior because it is a reflection of
our “belief strength and outcome evaluation” as well as our “motivation to comply to normative
beliefs” (Sideris & Kaissidis, 1998, p. 564).
Fig. 2 Theory of Reasoned Action (TRA) Schematic Model
This theory of reasoned action, developed by Ajzen & Fishbein (1973), posits that a
behavior is the direct antecedent of an intention, that acting upon personal will and motivation to
comply with social norms (the behavioral standards set by our significant others) is enough to
11
Cheng, Hernandez, Yang
LIBR 220 Fall 2012
Assignment 4
drive the behavior into existence. Attitude about a particular behavior is emphasized in this
theory as it affects the willingness to perform a behavior. Attitude and its relationship with how
we view our peers’ opinions influences our behavioral intention. In this theory, behavior is
described as voluntary and under individual volition and control; thus, the individual’s
behavioral intention is the best indicator of what the behavioral outcome will be (Ajzen &
Fishbein, 1973). While Ajzen and Fishbein do provide insightful evidence into human behavior
by examining the relationship between attitude and behavior to predict human intentions, the
theory seems to blindly state that an individual can will any behavior without limitation or
obstruction. A major shortcoming of this theory is that it does not factor in the obstacles that
may inhibit one to act on an intention, regardless of how carefully articulated or planned that
intention is. Thus, there is the possibility that the performance of a behavior may not entirely be
carried out as was intended or envisioned by the individual.
Fig. 3 Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) Schematic Model
Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB)
Ajzen (1988) developed the theory of planned behavior as an extension of his original
theory of reasoned action to further clarify the concept of behavioral intention and its role as the
12
Cheng, Hernandez, Yang
LIBR 220 Fall 2012
Assignment 4
primary determinant of human behavior. His theory of reasoned action (TRA) had designated
personal attitude and subjective norms as the predictors of a behavioral intention, claiming that it
directly influenced the performance of a behavior (Rivis, Sheeran, and Armitage, 2009, p. 2985).
However, in real life, we do not always get what we want, or in this case, do what we had
intended to do. Such constraints on our behavior include “limited ability, time, environmental or
organizational limits, and unconscious habits” (Fishbein & Ajzen, 1975). The planned behavior
theory acknowledges that uncertainty, in the form of an unknown and unforeseen variable, may
present a challenge for the performance of a behavior. Ajzen acknowledges such limitations by
stating that “some behaviors are more likely to present problems of control than others, but we
can never be absolutely certain that we will be in the position to carry out our intentions.
Viewed in this light it becomes clear that every intention is a goal whose attainment is subject to
some degree of uncertainty” (1985, p. 24).
Perceived behavioral control (PBC) is introduced in this theory in recognition of the fact
that there are limitations to our volitional control over our behaviors. It refers to the individual’s
perception about his ability to perform a behavior and the direct or indirect control he has over
behavioral intention and performance. This concept of perceived personal control speaks to our
individual competencies and self-efficacy to weigh attitudinal factors with environmental factors
that better informs our behavioral intentions and ultimately our behavior; with the addition of
this concept to the theory, Ajzen attempted to improve the model for human behavior and the
predictive power of behavioral intentions. The theory of planned behavior, then, states that
attitude toward the behavior, perception of subjective norms, and the added element of perceived
behavioral control, influences our behavioral intention and performance of behaviors. In this
theory, direct behavioral control refers to the individual’s perceived volition to enact this
13
Cheng, Hernandez, Yang
LIBR 220 Fall 2012
Assignment 4
behavior. Such volition or confidence to perform this behavior is prompted by one’s awareness
of his abilities like “knowledge, skills and competencies” (Sideris & Kaissidis, 1998, p. 565).
Indirect behavioral control, then, refers to the individual’s grasp of what external factors or
circumstances may enhance or hinder one’s ability to perform any given behavior.
It has been hypothesized that the combination of a positive attitude toward a behavior,
positive outlook on subjective norms and a high perceived behavioral control will generate a
strong behavioral intention (Rivis, Sheeran, and Armitage, 2009, p. 2985). A high perceived
behavioral control indicates that the individual has a high motivational level to perform this
given behavior and is confident about his abilities, which means that the individual is more likely
to perform this behavior.
Communication and the Application of Theories
Our communicative and behavioral styles are of significant importance in the work
environment as information professionals. From the perspective of our prospective clientele,
how we conduct ourselves and portray a positive attitude toward the work we do, to our
colleagues and our patrons gives them an inclination of our willingness and motivation to meet
their information needs. As information professionals, our job performance reflect our
individual competencies and has the possibility of speaking well of our colleagues and overall
efforts of our institution. To show a united front in terms of being on the same page about job
responsibilities, work ethic, standards of conduct and professionalism perpetuates our
commitment to the normative beliefs set forth by our institution and demonstrates our awareness
of each others’ acceptance levels of certain practices and behaviors. Furthermore, this display of
shared professional character traits feeds into a sense of comraderie and enthusiasm for their jobs
as well as a collective professional, behavioral intention that guides the work they do.
14
Cheng, Hernandez, Yang
LIBR 220 Fall 2012
Assignment 4
As information professionals, a primary responsibility is providing excellent information
services to our patrons and clients who seek our assistance, expertise and knowledge. An
important character trait to convey, on both a professional and personal level, is our commitment
to catering to their information needs with the selection of appropriate resource tools and a
pleasant disposition. A predictability in our exhibited level of approachability and helpfulness is
very much an indication of our intention to best fill their questions, comments and concerns. In
this case, the theory of reasoned action (TRA) serves as a strong theoretical model for predicting
the behavioral intentions of public reference librarians. The role of the public librarian is to
serve the information needs of all public library patrons and the significance of our role is
relative to the patron’s assessment of our communicative skills and behavioral attitudes. As
public librarians are expected to provide equal service to all who seek it, behavioral attitudes and
adherence to normative beliefs is of ample importance. The unpredictable nature of a reference
question in conjunction with the variant identity of the library patron (i.e., age, sex, religion,
ethnicity) should not disrupt the high level of professionalism and helpfulness exhibited by the
reference librarian. All in all, as our behavioral intentions are strong in terms of having a
favorable attitude towards providing reference services to those who seek information and, as
employees of an institution, we are motivated to comply to the professional standards set forth by
our employers, it can be determined that we will carry out a behavior that we had intended to
perform.
As the profession calls on librarians and information professionals to have clear
behavioral intentions, specifically, to make information available and accessible to their patrons,
it is also the information professional’s role to best interpret the behavioral and informationseeking intentions of his patron during a reference interview. In addition, the reference interview
15
Cheng, Hernandez, Yang
LIBR 220 Fall 2012
Assignment 4
provides the patron with the opportunity to articulate his behavioral intention; the success of the
reference interview (i.e., fulfilling the patron’s information needs) equips the patron with a level
of informational control to perform his intended behavior. For example, a teenager seeks the
assistance from a public reference librarian to gather some titles for recreational readings over
the holidays. He has a positive attitude about reading, is taking the advice given by his teacher to
cultivate his interests in reading (following normative beliefs), and thus, according to the
theoretical model of reasoned behavior, has a strong behavioral intention to explore reading
materials available at the library. Guided by the assistance of the librarian at the reference desk,
the teenager is able to fulfill his behavioral intention and to locate fictional titles that are of
interest to him for recreational reading. This scenario demonstrates that the theory of reasoned
behavior provides a straightforward model for combining one’s attitudes with one’s perception
of social beliefs to generating a behavioral intention that directly leads to the performance of an
intended behavior.
A business library environment is an appropriate setting to apply the theoretical model of
planned behavior and the concept of perceived behavioral control. As an Information Services
Assistant, I regularly receive emailed requests from information researchers and consultants
within my company to gather and organize financial and analyst reports from various online and
database sources. These requests are usually uniform in style and substance; the information
seeker gives an outline of his case project and then details the various information he needs as
well as the particular sources he seeks. Email correspondence is the primary method to exchange
information and during office hours, it is expected by parties at both ends, the email sender and
receiver, that a reply will be given within minutes. The uniformity of information requests and
the expectation for expedient correspondence are organizational standards and represents the
16
Cheng, Hernandez, Yang
LIBR 220 Fall 2012
Assignment 4
normative beliefs in the theoretical model of planned behavior. The information seeker’s
perceived behavioral control (his sense of control over the outcome of his behavior) comes from
his expectation that he will receive confirmation of his email from someone in the Information
Services department and his confidence that he followed the template of information requests
carefully and accurately. Such factors that may limit the information seeker’s perceived
behavioral control may be extraneous circumstances beyond his volitional control; these would
include having the wrong office hours or being unaware of shortened office hours due to a
holiday; not knowing that the entire Information Services department is away from their
computers and at a department training session; forgetting to cc: the entire department and
instead sending his information request to an information specialist who is out of the office, etc.
These are external factors that undermine the information seeker’s perceived behavioral control;
thus, while his behavioral intention may have been to expect a quick turnaround from the
Information Services department so that he could do much needed background research reading
before his next case project meeting, unfortunately, his behavior (not being adequately prepared
for his meeting) does not mirror his original behavioral intention. This theory demonstrates the
predictive power and importance of considering perceived behavioral control (PBC) (i.e.,
weighing personal control factors with the probability that external factors may impede an
action) to achieve the targeted behavior.
These predictive models of human behavior, the theory of reasoned action and theory of
planned behavior, provide the theoretical framework for behavior as an agent of communication,
which serves as the foundation for interaction, understanding of concepts and of others and
relationship building that defines human existence. Our personal behavior is indicative of the
social cues we learn from our peers as well as our social awareness that leads us to measure what
17
Cheng, Hernandez, Yang
LIBR 220 Fall 2012
Assignment 4
will be deemed as socially acceptable by our significant others. Behavioral intentions and
decisions are also reflective of our personal attitudes and beliefs and how we assess and evaluate
the consequences of our behavior. These belief systems and practiced thoughts have been
independently developed through various experiences (they have been cognitively processed and
stored) but also taught to us by our immediate social circles.
Theory of Reasoned Action / Planned Behavior & Social Learning Theory
These three theories, the theory of reasoned action, theory of planned behavior and social
learning theory are interrelated in terms of focusing on the observation of others’ behaviors and
behavioral outcomes to either inform learning or make behavioral decisions. Also, there is a
similarity between the theories in that there is a methodical way of reaching a predetermined
behavior: the first theory provides a schematic model where attitudes and subjective norms
create a behavioral intention that directly leads to the performance of a behavior; the second
theory relates attitudes and subjective norms to a perceived behavioral control which then leads
to a behavioral intention and then, ultimately, a targeted behavior; the social learning theory also
follows a process to a behavioral decision: a behavior is observed, information about that
behavior is retained and then voluntarily recreated, and then the individual makes the decision to
implement the observed behavior in another context. Overall, the three theories highlight the
volitional control of the individual to perform particular behaviors.
The theory of reasoned action and the theory of planned behavior portray the individual
as one who is observant of social rules of behavior and of the opinions and social acceptance
levels of significant others. While the individual acts upon his motivation and personal volition
to perform a behavior, he is cognizant of the behaviors of others and uses these behaviors as
compasses for his own behavioral decisions. The social learning theory also refers to the
18
Cheng, Hernandez, Yang
LIBR 220 Fall 2012
Assignment 4
positive reinforcements and rewards received from enacting particular behaviors, which is
indicative of the cognitive awareness of the individual that his actions occur within an
environment that is shared with others and that there are consequences to one’s behavior.
The three theories discuss the different avenues by which we come to perform particular
behaviors; the theory of reasoned action and the theory of planned behavior focus on the
behavioral intention as the source of reasoning our behavioral decisions while the social learning
theory looks at the information sources or ‘models’ we are exposed to in our daily lives.
Motivation to achieve a positive outcome from our behavior and to be rewarded for our behavior
are common threads in all three theories - motivation comes from aligning our behaviors with the
belief systems of our significant others as well as observing the rewards that are reaped by
others.
Attribution Theory
Introduction:
Attribution theory is part of cognitive social psychology and focuses on the human
propensity to explain why people behave the way they do (Gedeon & Rubin, 1999). The need to
explain events is a natural one for humans; it would be very difficult to function in the world if
we were unable to make sense as to why things happen. People tend to form implicit theories
about why people, including themselves, behave as they do and about what behavior to expect in
the future (Bernstein, Penner, Clark-Stewart, & Roy, 2006, p.682).
A central goal of attribution theory is to understand how people explain and draw
inferences from their observations of behavior (Heider, 1958). Many theorists have examined the
functions of attributions in some detail and have concluded that the causes and consequences of
attributions vary in relation to the function that attribution serves for the attributor (Forsyth,
1980). Attribution theories emphasizes that causal attributions underlie our behavior, cognition
19
Cheng, Hernandez, Yang
LIBR 220 Fall 2012
Assignment 4
and emotion. It argues that they are important for understanding, since being able to locate the
causal antecedents of an event, helps predict what will happen in the future (Majid, Sanford,
Pickering, 2006). According to this perspective, causal inferences constitute a core part in
everyday thinking.
Discussion of Attribution Theory
Attribution theory is deeply rooted in the work of Kurt Lewin, Julian Rotter, John
Atkinson, Fritz Heider, and Harold Kelley. Harold Kelley (1973) proposed an influential theory
of how people, who he called observers, make attributions about the actions of other people, who
he called actors. An example of this might look like this; you want to invite your friend over for
dinner, but your mother says no. According to Kelley, understanding the reason for your
mother’s behavior requires information about three key variables: consensus, consistency, and
distinctiveness.
Consensus: the degree to which other people’s behavior is similar to that of the actor – in
this case, your mother. If everyone you know avoids your friend, your mother’s
behavior has a high degree of consensus and you would attribute her reaction to an
external cause (probably something about your friend). However, if everyone except
your mother likes your friend, your mother’s negative response would have a low
consensus. In this case you would probably attribute the response to something about
your mother, such as rudeness or a personal dislike of your friend.
Consistency: the degree to which the behavior is the same across time and or/situations. If
your mother has invited your friend to dinner several times in the past but rejects your
friend this time, the consistency of her behavior is low. Low consistency suggests that
your mother’s behavior is attributable to external causes, such as the fact that your
friend cannot contact his parents for permission to stay. If your mother’s behavior
towards your friend is always hostile, it has high consistency.
20
Cheng, Hernandez, Yang
LIBR 220 Fall 2012
Assignment 4
Distinctiveness: the extent to which the actor’s response to one situation stands out from
responses to similar situations. If your mother is rude to all your friends, her behavior
toward your friend has low distinctiveness. Behavior that is low in distinctiveness is
usually attributable to internal causes, such as personality traits. However if your
mom gets along with everyone except your friend, her behavior has high
distinctiveness and your attribution about the cause of her behavior is likely to shift
toward a cause other than your mother’s personality, such as how your friend acts
around you or your family.
Kelley’s theory suggests that people are most likely to make internal attributions about an
actor’s behavior when there is low consensus, high consistency, and low distinctiveness.
Low Consensus
Few people
dislike your
friend.
+ +
High Consensus
Most people
dislike your
friend
High Consistency
Mom is always
rude to your friend
+ +
Low Consensus
Few people
dislike your
friend
High Consistency
Mom is always
rude to your friend
+
Low Consistency
Mom is usually
nice
to your friend
+
Low Distinctiveness
Mom is rude to all
your friends.
=
Internal Attribution
Mom’s rudeness is due to
something within her, “she is a
mean ol’lady.”
High Distinctiveness External Attribution
Mom is never rude to Mom’s rudeness is caused by
your other friends
something outside mom,
“Your friend is rude and
=
mean.”
High Distinctiveness External Attribution
Mom is never rude to Mom’s rudeness is caused by
your other friends.
something outside mom,
“Your friend must have done
=
something wrong.”
Within the context of attribution theory, an understanding of the causes of behaviors and
events, even if erroneous, reinforces the individual’s sense of personal control by fulfilling two
interrelated functions for the attributor; providing explanations of behavior and environmental
outcomes, and facilitating the prediction of these types of outcomes (Forsyth, 1980). Attributions
21
Cheng, Hernandez, Yang
LIBR 220 Fall 2012
Assignment 4
however, may not always serve to predict or explain. It has been shown that in some situations,
rational information processing may be biased, not only by the information collection and
processing distortions, but by individuals’ self-serving motivations (Forsyth, 1980). According to
Winter and Uleman (1984), if people make trait inferences when they observe behavior and
encode the information, those inferred traits should be stored in memory along with the
information on which they were based.
Bias in Attribution
Whatever the person’s background, most people are usually logical in their attempts to
explain behavior; however they are also sometimes prone to attributional biases that can distort
their views of behavior (Bernstein, Penner, Clark-Stewart, & Roy, 2006, p. 684). The
fundamental attribution error is a tendency to over attribute the behavior of others to internal
factors, such as personality traits. The inclination toward internal attributions is much less
pronounced when people explain their own behavior. In this example, another bias tends to come
into play; the actor-observer bias. This happens when people often attribute other people’s
behavior to external factors, especially when the behavior is inappropriate or inadequate
(Bernstein, Penner, Clark-Stewart, & Roy, 2006, p. 684). The actor-observer bias occurs mainly
because people have different kinds of information about their own behavior and about other’s
behavior. Lastly, the self-serving bias is the tendency to take personal credit for success but to
blame external causes for failure. The self-serving bias occurs partly because people are
motivated to maintain their self-esteem and ignoring negative information is one way to do so.
Attribution Theory & Libraries
Much has been written in terms of attribution theory and the workplace relating to
motivation and performance; unfortunately the literature is scarce and few as it relates to library
22
Cheng, Hernandez, Yang
LIBR 220 Fall 2012
Assignment 4
and information science. Of an exhaustive literature search of attribution theory and libraries,
two articles show relevance of how this theory can be applied in the information sciences;
Designing Motivation into Library and Information Skills Instruction, by Ruth Small (1998) and
Attribution Theory and Academic Library Performance Evaluation by Julie Gedeon and Richard
Rubin (1999).
According to Small (1998), the role of the library-media specialist is to help students
become effective users of ideas and information. To achieve this mission, effective library and
information skills instructional programs must not only help students acquire the skills they will
need to solve their information problems, but they must also stimulate intellectual curiosity and
encourage continued information seeking and exploration. Bernard Weiner (1972), proposes that
people will ascribe to one of four (two internal, two external) attributions to their success or
failure at a task. These attributions are:
1
ability (they succeeded because they are smart or talented or failed because they are not)
2
effort (they succeeded because they worked hard or failed because they did not put forth
enough effort)
3
task difficulty (they succeeded because the task was at the appropriate level of challenge
or failed because the task was too difficult or even succeeded because the task was too
easy)
4
luck (they succeeded or failed because some external form made it happen; e.g. the
teacher did or did not like them; there was a full moon; they were sitting in the “lucky” or
“unlucky” chair)
Small (1998) states that instruction, where appropriate, that encourages students to take
more internal responsibility for their own learning success or failure, will help to motivate them
to continue learning. There are, however, times when it is appropriate for students to have an
internal attribution (e.g., “I can’t learn this because I’m just not smart enough”) and appropriate
23
Cheng, Hernandez, Yang
LIBR 220 Fall 2012
Assignment 4
to have an external attribution (e.g., The test really was too difficult for the level or learners).
Instructional librarians/media-specialists working with faculty and teachers, should focus on
student effort and ability for understanding and using research skills to achieve related learning
objectives.
Julie Gedeon and Richard Rubin (1999), examine attribution theory as it relates to
performance evaluations of academic librarians. In this article discussion of performance
evaluation in academic libraries focuses on several areas include the use of performance review
as a motivational tool, peer review, evaluation for faculty status, standards of performance and
legal ramifications. The particular focus of using the attribution theory on performance
evaluation of academic librarians is differential evaluation based on gender. According to
Geddeon and Rubin (1999), there is substantial evidence demonstrating that men and women are
rated differently for identical performances; males consistently received more favorable
evaluations than females in academic libraries. Thus, the study conducted attempts to explain
such work evaluation behaviors involving psychological attributions.
Considering attribution theory, when evaluating perceived tasks that are easy, an external
attribution is more likely to be assigned (task difficulty or luck); when the task is perceived as
complex, internal attributions are more likely. In summary, if the tasks that women perform are
perceived to be easier, then they will receive less credit for the work; it is all in perspective.
Overall, Geddeon and Rubin (1999) state that attribution theory assists in explaining differential
evaluations of women and men; making raters aware of it can decrease its effects and increase
the effectiveness of evaluations without a gender bias as evidenced in academic libraries.
Conclusion
24
Cheng, Hernandez, Yang
LIBR 220 Fall 2012
Assignment 4
Attribution theory has a wide and varied role in everyday life and is an integral part of the
motivation process as evidenced by the two articles. Attribution theory plays an important role in
explaining virtually all reward-oriented behavior in library organizations; library instruction,
performance evaluations, gender biases and many others. Attribution theory is used to explain
the differences between high achievers and low achievers at school. Research shows that the two
groups have different attributions and hence their motivation varies. Attribution theory is also
closely related to education as emotional and motivational factors may influence academic
success and failure. Overall, Attribution theory is concerned with how and why ordinary people
explain events as they do.
Attribution Theory & Theory of Reasoned Action/Planned Behavior
Theory of Reasoned Action suggests that a person's behavior is determined by his/her
intention to perform the behavior and that this intention is, in turn, a function of his/her attitude
toward the behavior and his/her subjective norm. The theory of planned behavior is a theory
which predicts deliberate behavior, because behavior can be deliberative and planned. Although
in the category of social cognition and communication, attribution theory has its similarities and
differences in comparison. Attribution theory is part of cognitive social psychology and focuses
on the human propensity to explain why people behave the way they do. Initially looking at the
two theories side by side, one could make the assumption they will be similar; behavior leads to
attitude leading to explanation.
When comparing TRA/PB with Attribution Theory you must understand the differences
in definition. Theory of Reasoned Action states that the convergence of two forces, our personal
attitudes and social attitudes, dictate our behavioral intention and ultimately the performance of a
behavior. In other words, our behavioral intention is a reflection of our “belief strength and
25
Cheng, Hernandez, Yang
LIBR 220 Fall 2012
Assignment 4
outcome evaluation” as well as our “motivation to comply with normative beliefs” (Sideris &
Kaissidis, 1998, p. 564). Attribution Theory emphasizes that causal attributions underlie our
behavior, cognition, and emotion, and argue they are important for understanding since being
able to locate the causal antecedents of an event helps predict what will happen in the future
(Majid, Sanford, Pickering, 2006). It is this definition of attribution theory concerning predicting
future behaviors which lead to a similarity with Ajzen (1988) who developed the theory of
planned behavior as an extension of his original theory of reasoned action to provide further
clarification of behavioral intention and its role as the primary determinant of human behavior.
Looking at Kelley’s (1973) view of attribution theory of how observers make attributions
about the actions of actors; the theory or reasoned action/planned behavior leads directly to
intention. Intention is the cognitive representation of a person's readiness to perform a given
behavior, and it is considered to be the immediate antecedent of behavior. This intention is
determined by three things: their attitude toward the specific behavior, their subjective norms and
their perceived behavioral control. The theory of planned behavior holds that only specific
attitudes toward the behavior in question can be expected to predict that behavior. This is similar
to Kelley’s (1973) three variables to understanding behavior; consensus, consistency, and
distinctiveness. As mentioned earlier, these predictive models of human behavior, the theory of
reasoned action and theory of planned behavior, provide the theoretical framework for behavior
as an agent of communication, which serves as the foundation for interaction, understanding of
concepts and of others and relationship building that defines human existence. With that in mind,
attribution theory serves as an understanding of the causes of behaviors and events, even if
erroneous, reinforces the individual’s sense of personal control by fulfilling two interrelated
26
Cheng, Hernandez, Yang
LIBR 220 Fall 2012
Assignment 4
functions for the attributor; providing explanations of behavior and environmental outcomes, and
facilitating the prediction of these types of outcomes (Forsyth, 1980).
Conclusion
Communication theories provide a basis for interpreting and understanding our reasons
for communicative and behavioral decisions. How we exchange information through verbal and
behavioral cues creates a system of shared meaning, beliefs, values and attitudes. The four
communication theories discussed in this paper, Social Learning Theory, Theory of Reasoned
Action, Theory of Planned Action and Attribution Theory highlight the central role of the
individual to communicate his personal attitudes, observations of others and previous
experiences through the vehicle of his behavioral decisions. The theories present models that
reveal the driving forces of our behaviors, such as attitudes, normative beliefs, motivation and
rewards, personal control, and consistency. The performance of a single behavior is a personal
endeavor, but all four theories recognize the social influences and impacts of our behavioral
decisions.
27
Cheng, Hernandez, Yang
LIBR 220 Fall 2012
Assignment 4
References
Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision
Processes, 50(2), 179-211.
Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1973). Attitudinal and normative variables as predictors of specific
behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 27(1), 41-57.
Bandura, A. (1997). Social Learning Theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Bandura, A., & Grusec, J. E., & Menlove, F. L. (1966). Observational learning as a function of
symbolization and incentive set. Child Development, 37(3), 499-506.
Bandura, A., & Ross, D., & Ross, S. A. (1961). Transmission of aggression through imitation of
aggressive models. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 63, 575-582.
Bernstein, D., Penner, L., Clarke-Stewart, A., & Roy, E. (2006). Psychology Ap Version.
Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin College Div.
Brauer, J. R., & Tittle, C. R. (2012). Social learning theory and human reinforcement.
Sociological Spectrum: Mid-South Sociological Association, 32(2), 157-177.
Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention, and behavior: An
introduction to theory and research. Reading, Mass.; Don Mills, Ontario: AddisonWesley Pub. Co.
28
Cheng, Hernandez, Yang
LIBR 220 Fall 2012
Assignment 4
Forsyth, D. (1980). The functions of attributions. Social Psychology Quarterly, 43, 184189.
Gedeon, J., & Rubin, R. (1999). Attribution theory and academic library performance
evaluation. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 25(1), 18-25.
Heider, F. (1958). The psychology of interpersonal relations. New York, NY: John
Wiley & Sons.
Jurkowski, O., & Patricia, A., & Robins, J. (2005). Building bridges between students
and practitioners. Journal of Education for Library and Information Science, 46(3), 198209.
Kelley, H. (1973). The process of causal attribution. American Psychologist, 28, 107128.
Krohn, M. D. (1999). Social learning theory: the continuing development of a
perspective. Theoretical Criminology, 3(4), 462-476.
Majid, A., Sanford, A., & Pickering, M. (2007). The linguistic description of minimal
social scenarios affects the extent of causal inference making. Journal of Experimental
Social Psychology, 43, 918-932.
Rivis, A., Sheeran, P., & Armitage, C.J. (2009, December). Expanding the affective and
normative components of the theory of planned behavior: A meta-analysis of anticipated
affect and moral norms. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 39(12), 2985-3019.
Accessed November 20, 2012, from
http://web.ebscohost.com.libaccess.sjlibrary.org/ehost/detail?sid=19a7b84f-18b4-4c0a9434-
29
Cheng, Hernandez, Yang
LIBR 220 Fall 2012
Assignment 4
a3b7efe5ed29%40sessionmgr112&vid=1&hid=106&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2
ZQ%3d%3d#db=aph&AN=45671311
Sideris, G.D., Kaissidis, A., & Padeliadu, S. (1998). Comparisons of the theories of
reasoned action and planned behaviour. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 68,
563-580.
Small, R. (1998, January 1). Designing motivation into library and information skills
instruction | American Association of School Librarians (AASL). American Library
Association. Retrieved November 10, 2012, from
http://www.ala.org/aasl/aaslpubsandjournals/slmrb/slmrcontents/volume11998slmqo/sm
all
Weiner, B. (1972). Theories of motivation: from mechanism to cognition. Chicago, IL:
McNally.
Winter, L., & Uleman, J. (1984). When are social judgments made? Evidence for the
spontaneousness of trait inferences. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 47,
237-252.
Wood, R. & Bandura, A. (1989). Social cognitive theory of organizational management. The
Academy of Management Review, 14(3), 361-348.
30