Correspondence bias and attitude toward abortion: Effects of information from others

Abstract

This study investigated the influence of information from others on the correspondence bias in the attribution of attitudes. Participants were presented with an essay either for or against the legalization of abortion. They also received either no information, an argument mentioning the target person’s constraint, or behavior-inconsistent prior information about the target from a “fellow classmate.” Participants then estimated the constrained target person’s actual attitude. Results showed that the correspondence bias (CB) was substantially attenuated by the constraint argument and was reversed by the prior information. These findings demonstrate that arguments from others may prompt perceivers to make an inferential adjustment to take into account the target’s situational constraint, and that behavior-inconsistent prior information from others may lead perceivers to assign greater inferential weight to that information relative to the behavior.