Podcast
Questions and Answers
What does Ned Jones and Keith Davis's Correspondent Inference Theory explain?
What does Ned Jones and Keith Davis's Correspondent Inference Theory explain?
Why do people like to make correspondent inferences?
Why do people like to make correspondent inferences?
A dispositional cause is a stable cause that makes people's behavior predictable, increasing our sense of control.
To make a correspondent inference, we draw on five sources of information, or cues: freely chosen behavior, outcome bias, socially desirable behavior, ___, and ___.
To make a correspondent inference, we draw on five sources of information, or cues: freely chosen behavior, outcome bias, socially desirable behavior, ___, and ___.
hedonic relevance, personalism
What is freely chosen behavior?
What is freely chosen behavior?
Signup and view all the answers
What is outcome bias?
What is outcome bias?
Signup and view all the answers
Why does socially desirable behavior tell us little about a person's disposition?
Why does socially desirable behavior tell us little about a person's disposition?
Signup and view all the answers
What does hedonic relevance refer to?
What does hedonic relevance refer to?
Signup and view all the answers
What is personalism in the context of correspondent inference theory?
What is personalism in the context of correspondent inference theory?
Signup and view all the answers
What are the limitations of correspondent inference theory?
What are the limitations of correspondent inference theory?
Signup and view all the answers
Study Notes
Correspondent Inference Theory Overview
- Developed by Ned Jones and Keith Davis in 1965, with later contributions by Jones & McGillis in 1976.
- Explains how people attribute behaviors to stable personality traits or dispositions.
- Example: Inferring that a friendly action stems from an individual's disposition to be friendly.
Reasons for Making Correspondent Inferences
- People prefer dispositional causes as they provide predictability in behaviors.
- A sense of control over one’s environment is increased by understanding behavior through stable characteristics.
Sources of Information for Correspondent Inferences
- Five key cues are utilized in making correspondent inferences:
- Freely chosen behavior
- Outcome bias
- Social desirability
- Hedonic relevance
- Personalism
Free Choice in Behavior
- Behaviors performed of one’s own volition are more likely to lead to correspondent inferences.
- Indicates a stronger link between the action and underlying personality.
Outcome Bias
- Involves evaluating a decision based on its outcome rather than the decision-making process.
- Can lead to misjudgments in assessing the quality of behavior or decisions.
Socially Desirable Behavior
- Behavior that aligns with societal norms offers limited insight into a person's true disposition.
- Counter-normative behaviors are seen as better indicators of underlying traits for correspondent inferences.
Hedonic Relevance
- Pertains to actions that have significant direct consequences for oneself.
- Higher relevance increases the likelihood of making correspondent inferences.
Personalism
- Engages with behaviors that seem intended to directly benefit or harm oneself rather than others.
- Provides context for understanding motivations behind actions.
Limitations of Correspondent Inference Theory
- Relies heavily on the attribution of intentionality, but unintentional behaviors can also imply strong dispositions.
- The theory suggests assessing commonality of effects via comparisons of chosen versus non-chosen behaviors; however, individuals often overlook non-occurring behaviors, limiting accurate computations.
Studying That Suits You
Use AI to generate personalized quizzes and flashcards to suit your learning preferences.
Description
Explore the key concepts of Correspondent Inference Theory through these flashcards. Designed to help you understand how we attribute behaviors to personality traits, this quiz is an excellent revision tool for psychology students. Dive into the theories of Ned Jones and Keith Davis and their implications in social psychology.
