Running Head: SELF-SERVING ATTRIBUTIONS in SPORT
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
This article is downloaded from http://researchoutput.csu.edu.au It is the paper published as: Author: L. J. Aldridge and M. Rabiul Islam Title: Cultural differences in athlete attributions for success and failure: The sports pages revisited. Journal: International Journal of Psychology ISSN: 0020-7594 Year: 2012 Volume: 47 Issue: 1 Pages: 67-75 Abstract: Self-serving biases in attribution, while found with relative consistency in research with Western samples, have rarely been found in Japanese samples typically recruited for research. However, research conducted with Japanese participants to date has tended to use forced choice and/or reactive paradigms, with school or university students, focusing mainly on academic performance or arbitrary and/or researcher-selected tasks. This archival study explored whether self-serving attributional biases would be shown in the real-life attributions for sporting performance made by elite Olympic athletes from Japan and Australia. Attributions (N = 216) were extracted from the sports pages of Japanese and Australian newspapers and rated by Australian judges for locus and controllability. It was hypothesised that Australian, but not Japanese, athletes would show self-serving biases such that they attributed wins to causes more internal and controllable than the causes to which they attributed losses. Contrary to predictions, self-serving biases were shown to at least some extent by athletes of both nationalities. Both Australian and Japanese men attributed wins to causes more internal than those to which they attributed losses. Women, however, attributed wins and losses to causes that did not differ significantly in terms of locus. All athletes tended to attribute wins to causes that were more controllable than the causes to which losses were attributed. Results are inconsistent with a large body of research suggesting that Japanese do not show self-serving biases in attribution, and are discussed in the light of differences in methodology, context and participants that may have contributed to these effects. URLs: http://researchoutput.csu.edu.au/R/-?func=dbin-jump- full&object_id=34961&local_base=GEN01-CSU01 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00207594.2011.585160 Author Address: [email protected] CRO Number: 34961 ATHLETE ATTRIBUTIONS FOR SUCCESS AND FAILURE 2 Running Head: ATHLETE ATTRIBUTIONS FOR SUCCESS AND FAILURE Cultural Differences in Athlete Attributions for Success and Failure: The Sports Pages Revisited Authors: Lynley J Aldridge, Mir Rabiul Islam Affiliation: School of Psychology, Charles Sturt University, Bathurst, NSW, Australia Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to: Mir Rabiul Islam, School of Psychology, Charles Sturt University, Bathurst NSW 2795 Australia. Email: [email protected]. Phone/Fax: +61 2 63384567 ATHLETE ATTRIBUTIONS FOR SUCCESS AND FAILURE 3 Abstract Self-serving biases in attribution, while found with relative consistency in research with Western samples, have rarely been found in Japanese samples typically recruited for research. However, research conducted with Japanese participants to date has tended to use forced choice and/or reactive paradigms, with school or university students, focusing mainly on academic performance or arbitrary and/or researcher-selected tasks. This archival study explored whether self-serving attributional biases would be shown in the real-life attributions for sporting performance made by elite Olympic athletes from Japan and Australia. Attributions (N = 216) were extracted from the sports pages of Japanese and Australian newspapers and rated by Australian judges for locus and controllability. It was hypothesised that Australian, but not Japanese, athletes would show self-serving biases such that they attributed wins to causes more internal and controllable than the causes to which they attributed losses. Contrary to predictions, self-serving biases were shown to at least some extent by athletes of both nationalities. Both Australian and Japanese men attributed wins to causes more internal than those to which they attributed losses. Women, however, attributed wins and losses to causes that did not differ significantly in ATHLETE ATTRIBUTIONS FOR SUCCESS AND FAILURE 4 terms of locus. All athletes tended to attribute wins to causes that were more controllable than the causes to which losses were attributed. Results are inconsistent with a large body of research suggesting that Japanese do not show self-serving biases in attribution, and are discussed in the light of differences in methodology, context and participants that may have contributed to these effects. Keywords: Cultural Differences, Sport, Social Cognition, Causal Attribution, Gender/Sex Roles ATHLETE ATTRIBUTIONS FOR SUCCESS AND FAILURE 5 Acknowledgements This article is based on the first author’s honours dissertation. We acknowledge with gratitude helpful feedback received on an earlier draft of this paper by David Matsumoto and anonymous reviewers. ATHLETE ATTRIBUTIONS FOR SUCCESS AND FAILURE 6 Cultural Differences in Athlete Attributions for Success and Failure: The Sports Pages Revisited According to recent research, the causes to which people attribute their successes and failures may differ with their cultural background. More specifically, it has been suggested that differences in the way the self is construed across cultures can be related to cultural differences in the tendency to self-enhance (Markus & Kitayama, 1991). The tendency to maintain self- esteem through self-serving biases (i.e., attribute successes more internally than failures; Zuckerman, 1979) would be more frequent among Euro-American (i.e., “Western”) cultures, where the self is construed more independently. In East Asian societies influenced by a shared Confucian heritage, interdependent self-construals are said to be more common. In such societies there appears to be a tendency to focus self-critically on one’s own weaknesses, so as to better maintain and affirm relationships and fulfil role obligations. Consistent with this suggestion, a review by Kitayama, Takagi and Matsumoto (1995) of 23 studies conducted with Japanese participants, and a recent meta-analysis (Mezulis, Abramson, Hyde, & Hankin, 2004), found virtually no evidence of self-serving biases in Japanese samples. In laboratory ATHLETE ATTRIBUTIONS FOR SUCCESS AND FAILURE 7 studies (e.g., solving anagrams) conducted mostly with university students, Japanese tend to attribute failures to internal factors (e.g., ability and effort), whereas successes are attributed to factors which are external (e.g., task difficulty, luck, or the situation), or internal but relatively unstable (e.g., mental or physical “shape” of the day). Failures in naturalistic studies (e.g., academic achievement) tend to be attributed, as much as successes, to internal causes such as ability and (particularly) effort (e.g., Miyamoto, 1985; Yamauchi, 1989). Where direct comparisons have been made, research with children discussing mathematics performance (Miyamoto, 1985) and mothers discussing parenting success or failure (Bornstein et al., 1998) suggests that Japanese tend to attribute success to internal causes (typically ability) to a lesser extent, and failure to internal causes (typically effort) to a greater extent, than Westerners (usually Americans). The case for the absence of self-serving attributions in Japanese populations, however, relies heavily on evidence from laboratory-based and/or forced choice research paradigms of arguably limited realism and generalisability. To address such criticisms, as well as for its intrinsic interest, many Western researchers interested in attributional biases have turned their focus to the sporting arena (Lau & Russell, 1980; Mullen & Riordan, 1988). ATHLETE ATTRIBUTIONS FOR SUCCESS AND FAILURE 8 This provides a “real life” context where tasks are more realistic and involving, and performance expectancies and outcomes more meaningful. To enhance realism, there has been a growing trend away from forced-choice and reactive paradigms requiring participants to respond directly to questions using only the four elements of ability, effort, task difficulty, and luck. Researchers have instead begun to use spontaneous attributions and/or open-ended paradigms. Theories have also been extended to incorporate multiple dimensions of causality (e.g., Weiner, 1972, 1979): locus (i.e., the extent to which causes are found within the person whose behaviour is being explained vs. the external environment); stability (i.e., the extent to which causes remain relatively constant vs. fluctuate with time); and controllability (i.e., the extent to which causes are under the volitional control of an actor or co-actor). In particular, it has been suggested that situational norms in a sporting context might discourage external attributions for losses, while attributions remain self-serving in terms of their stability and controllability (Grove, Hanrahan, & McInman, 1991; Mark, Mutrie, Brooks, & Harris, 1984). Losses might be attributed to internal but temporary factors out of one’s own control, while wins are attributed to factors both stable and personally controllable. Research in this vein has found considerable evidence of self-serving biases in the attributions of athletes from Western cultures. Winning or ATHLETE ATTRIBUTIONS FOR SUCCESS AND FAILURE 9 successful athletes across a range of sports tend to make more internal and/or controllable attributions than losing or unsuccessful athletes (Grove et al., 1991;