Revisiting the relationship between attributional style and academic performance.

Diane M Houston

doi:10.1111/jasp.12356

Abstract

Previous research into the relationship between attributions and academic performance has produced contradictory findings that have not been resolved. The present research examines the role of specific dimensions of attributional style in predicting subsequent academic performance in a sample of pupils (N = 979) from both high‐ and low‐achieving schools. Hierarchical regression and moderation analyses indicate that internal, stable, and global, attributional styles for positive events predict higher levels of academic performance. Global attributions for negative events were related to poorer performance across all schools. Stable attributions for negative events were related to higher levels of performance in high‐achieving schools but not in low‐achieving schools. Higher levels of internality for negative events were associated with higher performance only in low achieving schools.

Highlights

The term attribution refers to the causal inferences people make to predict and explain the behaviors of self and others (Heider, 1958)
In line with the model, “healthy,” internal, stable, and global, attributional style for positive events was correlated with higher academic performance
This effect was stronger in the low-achieving schools than in the high achieving schools. This is the first time the relationship between style for positive events has been evaluated in both highand low-ability contexts and the findings provide evidence that attributional style for positive events plays a more important role when the ability context is broad, than when it is selective or high achieving

Summary

Introduction

The term attribution refers to the causal inferences people make to predict and explain the behaviors of self and others (Heider, 1958). The third dimension, controllability, distinguished between attributions of performance to those which are within the individual’s control versus those which are not Weiner argued that those high in achievement motivation attribute success to high ability and effort, and failure to lack of effort, not lack of ability. The reformulated model of helplessness and depression (Abramson, Seligman, & Teasdale, 1978) and the hopelessness model of depression (Abramson, Metalsky, & Alloy, 1989) proposed that individual differences in styles of attribution predispose individuals to explain events in a consistent manner across different contexts and the lifespan These differences in attributional style were hypothesized to determine whether an individual is at risk of developing cognitive, motivational, and emotional deficits associated with hopelessness and depression. It is worth noting that within the literature, some researchers use the terms “pessimistic” and “optimistic” (e.g., Satterfield, Monahan, & Seligman, 1997) and that negative and positive life events are often referred to as “failure” and “success” (e.g., Tiggemann & Crowley, 1993)

Objectives

Results

Conclusion