A test of the joint model of causal attribution

Abstract

The joint model integrates Mill's methods of difference and agreement for making causal attributions, and introduces a novel type of context attributions which reflect the opposite categories of the standard attribution responses provided in previous covariation research external versus the person, general versus the stimulus, and stable versus the occasion). The joint model predicts that attributions to standard causes require Mill's method of difference and that attributions to context causes require Mill's method of agreement. Two empirical studies demonstrated that the joint model fitted adequately with all of subject's standard and context attribution responses, in contrast to earlier theorizing and data involving only the method of difference (cf. Cheng & Novick, 1990) or only the method of agreement (cf. Hilton, Smith & Kim, 1995) which received less empirical support. © 1997 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.