Summary:
Harold Kelley advanced the understanding of attribution theory with his Covariation Model (1967), which emphasizes that people make attributions (i.e., explanations for behavior) by examining how consistent, consensual, and distinctive the behavior is across different situations and contexts. Kelley’s model posits that individuals are not only motivated to make sense of the world by ascribing causes to behavior, but they also use specific cues to decide whether to make an internal attribution (assigning the behavior to the individual’s traits or personality) or an external attribution (attributing behavior to situational factors). Kelley’s model suggests that the more a person can analyze these cues, the more accurate their attribution will be.
Core Components of Kelley’s Covariation Model
The Covariation Model proposes that we look at three key pieces of information when making attributions:
- Consistency: Does the person behave in the same way in similar situations over time? High consistency suggests that the behavior is likely due to internal factors, while low consistency implies external causes.
- Consensus: Do others behave the same way in the same situation? High consensus (when many people behave similarly) points to external factors, suggesting that the situation influences behavior. Low consensus (when few others behave similarly) suggests internal causes, where the individual’s unique characteristics are the likely cause.
- Distinctiveness: Does the person behave differently in different situations? High distinctiveness (behavior is specific to this situation) points to an external cause, as the person is acting in a way that is uncommon in other contexts. Low distinctiveness (behavior is common across situations) suggests internal causes, meaning the person is acting this way due to personal traits.
Kelley’s model predicts that, when faced with a behavior, people use these three types of information to make a decision:
- If consistency is high, consensus is low, and distinctiveness is low, an internal attribution is likely.
- If consistency is high, consensus is high, and distinctiveness is high, an external attribution is more probable.
By evaluating these factors, people aim to establish whether a behavior is due to the person themselves or the situation in which they find themselves.
Kelley’s Model can be applied in various contexts to explain how people judge and interpret behaviors. For instance, in workplace settings, employees may observe a colleague’s performance and make attributions about why the colleague is performing well or poorly. If a colleague has consistently performed well in similar tasks (high consistency), while others struggle to perform at the same level (low consensus), employees may attribute their colleague’s success to internal traits such as competence or skill (internal attribution). Alternatively, if the colleague’s success can be attributed to a unique project or a particularly supportive manager (high consensus and distinctiveness), they might attribute the performance to external factors (e.g., the situational context).
An Application:
An interesting real-life application of Kelley’s Covariation Model can be seen in conflict resolution and communication. For example, in a workplace conflict, if two employees disagree over a project, one might attribute the disagreement to the other person’s personality (an internal attribution). However, according to Kelley’s model, the employee making the attribution would consider several factors. If they notice that the colleague consistently behaves the same way in all interactions (high consistency), but many others also share the same opinion (high consensus), they may recognize that the disagreement could be due to external factors, such as the project’s challenging nature or a lack of clarity in communication (external attribution). However, if the colleague acts this way only in this situation (low distinctiveness), it may be perceived as a personality trait, prompting the individual to focus on interpersonal communication or even a personality clash.
This process of making attributions influences not only the perception of others but also how we respond to them. Effective communication depends on understanding whether behavior is attributed to internal or external causes, as misattributions can escalate conflicts or prevent cooperative resolutions. Recognizing the role of external factors, such as stressful conditions, can lead to more empathy and understanding, fostering a more supportive work environment.
Do you think people attribute causes to other peoples' behaviour by making these complex calculations or do they do this in other ways (e.g., 'gut instinct')?
Key References
Kelley, H. H. (1973). The processes of causal attribution. American Psychologist, 28, 107–128.
This foundational work presents Kelley’s Covariation Model, elaborating on how consistency, consensus, and distinctiveness contribute to making internal or external attributions.
Hesketh, B. (1984). "Attribution Theory and Unemployment: Kelley's Covariation Model, Self-Esteem, and Locus of Control." Journal of Vocational Behaviour.
This study tested Kelley's covariation model in the context of unemployment, examining how individuals with different self-esteem and locus of control attributes made attributions for their job-seeking outcomes. The laboratory study supported the model, but a field study did not replicate the findings
Michela, J. L., & Kelley, H. H. (1980). "The Covariation Model: A Systematic Approach to the Study of Attribution. Psychological Review, 87(4), 666-685.
This article offers an in-depth review and further application of Kelley's covariation model, exploring its use in various social situations and detailing the role of consistency, consensus, and distinctiveness in shaping attribution processes.
