Bias in attribution of success and failurein a real quiz game situation

Ljudska potreba za razumijevanjem događaja u socijalnoj okolini glavni je pokretač procesa atribuiranja. Istraživanja su pokazala da se ljudi pitaju “zašto?“ i kad se to ne traži od njih, a osobito u situacijama nepotvrđenih očekivanja i frustracije izazvane neuspjehom. Pretpostavka je da će i sudionici specifične situacije postignuća kakva je kviz Najslabija karika, kao spoj kviza znanja i igre na sreću,biti visoko motivirani atribuirati svoj rezultat. Cilj je istraživanja bio ispitati u laboratorijskim uvjetima utvrđene postavke u jednoj prirodnoj situaciji postignuća. Zanimalo nas je hoće li natjecatelji pokazati pristrano atribuiranje, sklonost da uspjehe pripišemo internalnim, a neuspjehe eksternalnim uzrocima, odnosno stereotipno atribuiranje na način da će svoj rezultat muškarci atribuirati očekivano pristrano, a žene obrnuto. Na uzorku od 532 igrača primijenjena je Skala za atribuiranje specifičnih razloga uspjeha/neuspjeha sa 17 atributa, a dobivena je i mjera atribucije uspjeha/neuspjeha na trima osnovnim dimenzijama: mjesto uzročnosti, stabilnost i podložnost kontroli. Rezultati su statistički obrađeni i interpretirani.Realno procjenjujući konkretnu kviz situacijui uspješni i neuspješni igrači svoj su ishod u najvećoj mjeri pripisali sreći. Navodeći ostale atribute koji su pridonijeli ishodu, zaključuju pristrano. Kao uzroke svoga uspjeha uspješni navode internalne uzroke - znanje i samopouzdanje kao stabilne faktore te dobru koncentraciju, sposobnost brzog odgovaranja i bankiranja, zalaganje kao nestabilne faktore. Neuspješni navode nestabilne uzroke svoga neuspjeha - slabu koncentraciju, tremu i neiskustvo u kvizovima kao internalne faktore te težinu pitanja kao eksternalni faktor. Pobjednici i poraženi značajno se razlikuju u svojim atribucijama na dimenzijama stabilnosti i podložnost kontroli,ali se ne razlikuju u mjestu uzročnosti. Razlike u atribuiranju po spolu ili nisu utvrđene ili ne idu u očekivanom smjeru- žene su, a ne muškarci, u većoj mjeri svoj neuspjeh pravdalenestabilnim internalnim i eksternalnim faktorima.The human need for understanding the events in a social environment is the main driver behind the process of attribution. Studies have shown that people ask the question "Why?" even when it is not required of them, especially in situations of unconfirmed expectations and frustrations caused by the failure. We assumed that the participants in the specific situation of achievement suchas a quiz The weakest link, which is a combination of quiz and a game of chance, will be highly motivated to attribute their result. The aim of the research was to examine in a natural situation, the assumptions established in laboratory settings. We were interested in whether the results show biased attribution, tendency to attribute successes internally and causes of failuresexternally, and further whether there will be stereotyped attribution in a way that men attribute their results in a biased way, and woman in the opposite direction. On a sample of 532 players we applied the Scale for the attribution of specific reasons for success/failure with 17 attributes, and derived a measure of attribution of success/failure of the three basic dimensions: the location of causality, stability and susceptibility to control. The results were statistically analyzed and interpreted.Realistically assessing the actual quiz situation both the successful and unsuccessful players have largely attributed their outcomes to luck. Citing other attributes that contributed to the outcome, their conclusions were biased: the successful players list internal factors as the causes of their success - the knowledge, confidence as stable factors and good concentration, the ability to respond quickly, timely bank the money and dedication as unstable factors. Unsuccessful players state unstable causes of their failure - poor concentration, stage freight and lack of experience in quizzes as internally factors and difficulty of tasks as external factor. There is a significant difference between winners and losers in their attributions on the dimensions of stability and susceptibility to control but no significant difference in causation. Gender based differences in the attribution have either not been confirmed or they do not go in the expected direction - the women, not men, have excused their failure to a greater extent using unstable internal and external factors