Attribution Theory

One of the interesting things that Marie Stopforth taught us on our Psychology for Coaches programme was Attribution Theory.  This is a favourite of hers (the subject of her PhD, if I remember rightly) so I probably won't do it justice (at least in her eyes) but I found it interesting and have already mentioned it to some supervisors I was supervising, and they found it interesting and useful too.

Attribution theory looks at the meaning we attribute to our successes or failures, and analyses them according to a few key variables. One is the locus of control: internal (dispositional) or external (situational); a second is the likelihood of reoccurrence: stable or unstable; a third is whether it is under our control or not.

Initially, we may have a number of thoughts about a failure, for example. What matters is which one we settle on.

If we experience a failure, and we attribute it to internal factors (our preparedness) that we see as unstable and controllable (I could prepare better next time), that helps us both practically and psychologically: we are more likely to try again, and to increase the likelihood of future success. Though there is a risk that we beat ourselves up, so we need to guard against that.

However, if we attribute a failure to external factors (task difficulty) that we see as stable and uncontrollable (that will always be an impossible ask!), then both our motivation to try again and our readiness to learn and improve are diminished. As this exonerates us from responsibility, it is a satisfying take, in the short term; so we need to guard against that, too!

Likewise with success: if we attribute a success to external factors (luck) that are unstable and uncontrollable (who knows if I’ll be so lucky again?...) both learning and motivation to re-engage are reduced. Whereas, if we attribute our success to internal factors (the level of skill I have acquired) that are stable and controllable (as long as I stay in practice, I’ll maintain my skill level) motivation and an agenda for continual improvement are both enhanced.

These can all be supported and reinforced by various biases (the self-serving bias and confirmation bias, particularly). Note also the fundamental attribution error. When someone cuts you up at the junction, you attribute it to disposition: they’re such a jerk! Whereas when you have to cut in in front of someone, it is clearly situational: I’ve got a train to catch!

Of course, in reality, there are many factors that contribute to success or failure. What is valuable, then, is to understand the impact of the attributions we make, and work intelligently with that understanding

I like the story of the soccer team that was beaten 1-0 in the 90th minute, because the referee awarded a very dodgy penalty against them. In the dressing room, the story was rapidly developing that it was external and beyond their control (dodgy ref) and unstable (who knows if it would happen again). That left them as helpless victims.

Their coach picked up on this and pointed out that they had had three opportunities to score in the first half that they had failed to convert: had they done so, the last minute goal against them would not have altered the result. She helped them see the degree to which their failure to convert was within their control, internal, and unstable - it could be changed by more skill and tactical awareness.  That gave them something to work on, on the training ground - and some hope that better results were possible in the future.

It is particularly valuable to identify any habits of attribution that are unhelpful to us, and work consciously on these, building new habits as necessary. Likewise, if we are coaching others, noticing, and helping them to notice, such patterns is extremely valuable.

--

All images: AI