Browsing by Author "Arnoult, Lynn H."

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Attributional style and common problems in adaptation: depression, loneliness, and shyness
    (1984) Arnoult, Lynn H.; Anderson, Craig A.; Brelsford, John W.; Klineberg, Stephen L.
    A questionnaire study was conducted to examine relationships between attributional style and some common problems in adaptation. College students completed scales measuring depression, loneliness, and shyness. In addition, they completed a questionnaire measuring attributional style on four causal dimensions (locus, globality, stability, and controllability), for four types of situations (interpersonal success, noninterpersonal success, interpersonal failure, and noninterpersonal failure). The results of a series of regression analyses led to the following conclusions: (a) Controllability is the most important dimension in predicting depression, loneliness, and shyness; (b) Locus of attributions for failure contributes significantly to prediction of these problems? (c) The globality and stability dimensions do not add significantly to problem prediction? (d) Attributional style predicts each one of the three problems especially well when attributions are measured for the types of situations that are particularly relevant to that problem. These results have implications for attributional models of depression, loneliness, and shyness.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Discriminating information source: Inference versus observation
    (1990) Arnoult, Lynn H.; Watkins, Michael J.
    People rely extensively on inference as a source of information, and sometimes they confuse inference with observation. Specifically, inferred information is sometimes mistaken for observed information. Such confusion of inference with observation can be problematic, especially if the inferred information is erroneous. One factor that might affect the probability of mistaking inference for observation is the degree of consistency between inferred information and subsequently encountered information. The present research was designed to test this possibility. In three experiments subjects made inferences on the basis of presented information, and then were given additional information that was varied in consistency with the information they had inferred. Finally, subjects were tested for accuracy in discriminating the source (inference vs. observation) of the inferred information. As expected, accuracy was lower when subsequently presented information was relatively consistent with inferred information than when it was relatively inconsistent with inferred information. This effect did not vary with delay between making an inference and attempting to discriminate information source. It is concluded that consistency of inferred information with subsequently encountered information can affect the probability of mistaking inference for observation, with the probability of error increasing as consistency increases.