Effects of Leadership Status and Performance Feedback on Self and other Attributions and Task Performance

Abstract

Subjects' attributions of self and others were examined as a function of leadership status (supervisor vs subordinate) and feedback on performance (positive, negative, or no feedback). Each group had one supervisor and two subordinates (one confederate and one subordinate-subject). Bogus performance feedback was given to each group at random. In their attribution of success, subjects rated confederates as having more success on the task than themselves, so they presented themselves modestly in a social context. Supervisors assigned much less responsibility to themselves than to confederates and subordinates. However, subordinates' attributions of responsibility for self and others were not significantly different. Supervisors and subordinates performed equally well on “quantity” of performance, yet the former were able to maintain a significantly better “qualify” of performance than the latter. Generalization from a laboratory study to actual work situations is not appropriate until justified by appropriate field work.