The Self-Serving Bias in Children
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
THE SELF-SERVING BIAS IN CHILDREN Rhonda Darlene Snow B .A. (Hons .), Simon Fraser University, 1982 M.A., Simon Fraser University, 1986 THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY in the Department of Psychology O Rhonda Darlene Snow 1993 SIMON FRASER UNIVERSITY August 1993 All rights reserved. This work may not be reproduced in whole or in part, by photocopy or other means, without permission of the author. APPROVAL Name: Rhonda Darlene Snow Degree: Doctor of Philosophy (Psychology) Title of thesis: The Self-serving Bias in Children Examining Committee: Chair: Dr. K. Bartholomew - ~r.m Associate Professor of Psychology - - - Dr. M. M& Associate Professor of Psychology Dr. E. ~6es Internal External Examiner Associate Professor of Psychology - Dr. B. Earn External Examiner Professor of Psychology University of Guelph / Date Approved: b PM 99 PARTIAL COPYRIGHT LICENSE I hereby grant to Simon Fraser University the right to lend my thesis, project or extended essay (the title of which is shown below) to users of the Simon Fraser University Library, and to make partial or single copies only for such users or in response to a request from the library of any other university, or other educational institution, on its own behalf or for one of its users. I further agree that permission for multiple copying of this work for scholarly purposes may be granted by me or the Dean of Graduate Studies. It is understood that copying or publication of this work for financial gain shall not be allowed without my written permission. TitIe of Thesis/Project/Extended Essay Theself-serving Bias in Children Author: - (signadye) Rhonda Darlene Snow (name) ABSTRACT This study examined the self-serving bias in elementary school-aged children. One hundred thirty one children in grades 1,4, and 7 competed with a fictitious other in four tasks: two academic tasks and two sports tasks. Subjects and their opponents experienced different outcomes; when the subjects did well, their opponents did poorly. Children won and lost on one task within each domain. After completing each task, children rated their own and the other's wins and losses on the five dimensions of responsibility, internality, globality, stability, and controllability. The self-serving bias was operationally defined in four ways: ratings for wins greater than ratings for losses for the self; widlose differences in ratings for self greater than this same difference for the other; ratings for wins of the self greater than for wins of the other (self-enhancement); and ratings for losses of the self greater than for losses of the other (self-protection). Regardless of how the self-serving bias was defined, evidence for the operation of a self-serving bias was found in children in all three grades and in two levels of self-perceived competence. Grade differences were evident on some dimensions; where found, they tended to show that attributional ratings made by the younger children were stronger than those made by older children. Self- perceived competence differences were also evident on some dimensions; where found, they indicated that ratings made by children high in self-perceived competence were significantly greater than those made by children low in self-perceived competence. No sex or domain differences were found. These results suggest that the self-serving bias does operate in elementary school-aged children. In addition to the differences found in ratings of wins and losses for the self and others (i.e., the 4 measures of self-serving bias), differences found for ratings of specific causes of wins and losses are discussed with reference to self-servingness. .. 111 DEDICATION To K. R., my greatest supporter, in memory of Gaye ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to acknowledge the many valuable contributions of my senior supervisor, Dr. Dennis Krebs, and committee members, Dr. Robert Ley and Dr. Marlene Moretti. I would also like to thank Dr. Ray Koopman for the significant contribution he made to this study. To Steven Fossen and Joseph van Tunen, my gratitude for their technical assistance and support which proved invaluable. Finally, my thanks to Brooke and all the other children who participated in this study, and to Danielle Krebs who assisted in the data collection. TABLE OF CONTENTS Approval ............................................................................................................................... ii ... Abstract.......................................................................................................... ...................... ill ... List of Tables..................................................................................................................... vu List of Figures ...................................................................................................................... ix I . Introduction........................................................................................ ....................... 1 Self-serving Bias Defied ......................................................................................... 1 Functions of the Self-serving Bias........................................................................... 4 Individual Differences in Self-serving Bias in Adults............................................... 6 Evidence of Self-serving Bias in Children................................................................ 6 Individual Differences in Self-serving Bias in Children......................................... 15 Developmental Differences...................................................................................... 16 Problems with Research on the Self-serving Bias in Children............................... 17 Conclusion............................................................................................................. 35 The Present Study................................................................................................... 39 . Predlctlons.............................................................................................................. 40 I1 . Method .................................................................................................................... 48 Design..................................................................................................................... 48 Subjects................................................................................................................... 48 Materials and Scoring.............................................................................................. 49 111. Results.................................................................................................................... 56 Analyses Relevant to the Primary Issues Related to Self-serving Biases................ 62 Multivariate and Univariate Analyses of Variance Results on the Key Variables of Outcome (Win/Lose) and Person (SelWOther)............................... 62 Grade Differences................................................................................................... 73 Self-perceived Competence Differences.................................................................. 84 Analyses Relevant to the Secondary Issues Related to Self-serving Biases: Ratings of Individual Causes. Performance Evaluations. and Task Repeated ........................................................................................................... 94 Performance Evaluations....................................................................................... 107 Task Selected to Repeat ......................................................................................... 108 IV . Discussion............................................................................................................. 110 Self-serving Bias.................................................................................................. 111 . Ratings of Indlvldual Causes................................................................................ 125 Choice of Task...................................................................................................... 126 Conclusion............................................................................................................ 127 Appendix A....................................................................................................................... 132 Appendix C....................................................................................................................... 172 Appendix D....................................................................................................................... 173 Appendix E ....................................................................................................................... 177 Appendix P ...................................................................................................................... 178 Appendix G....................................................................................................................... 179 Appendix H ....................................................................................................................... 180 Appendix 1........................................................................................................................ 181 Appendix K....................................................................................................................... 188 4 References........................................................................................................................