International Review of Social Psychology is almost 30 years old

By: RIPS - IRSP Blog on 7:23 AM

In 2018, the International Review of Social Psychology (IRSP) will celebrate its 30^th anniversary. Today, the creation of a page dedicated to the review provides an opportunity to announce upcoming issues as well as revisiting some articles published in the past years. For our first presentation of publications that have been published in the journal, we selected an article published 20 years ago by Serge Guimond in the January 1995 issue.

This research focuses on the types of explanations that individuals provide to explain different kinds of phenomena. Do individuals who attribute what happens in their personal life to internal causes (i.e., personality, talent, determination) tend to do the same for social events, such as unemployment and poverty?

Intuitive explanation for personal and social events

Dating back to Heider’s initial descriptions (1958), numerous studies have shown that people have a preference for attributing observed behavior to internal causes. For instance, think back to that time when you were driving and another driver cut you off. It is more likely that you explained this behavior in terms of personality or driving style of the driver rather than focusing on potential characteristics related to the situation, such as an emergency. More than a preference, explanations that emphasize the disposition rather than the situation is socially valued in Western cultures (cf. norm of internality, Beauvois & Dubois, 1988). If this general preference can be observed for personal events, research shows that preferences for explanations of social events can vary as a function of academic socialization.

Academic training and explanation of social events

It has been shown that causal attributions of social events can change significantly according to the student’s field of study (Guimond & Palmer, 1990). Social science students explain more social events (such as poverty and unemployment) by external attributions than business and engineering students. However, these differences only begin to appear at the end of the first year. Thus, to examine the types of explanations (internal versus external) provided by individuals according to the types of events (personal versus social), this research compared responses of university students at the beginning of their training in social sciences to responses of university students that were completing their undergraduate cycle in the same field.

Explanation for personal and social events are affected by socialization

The results of this study show that social sciences socialization reinforces the tendency to explain social events through external causes and to explain personal events through internal causes. Furthermore, as it is possible for students to change their field of study if they realize that their choice does not ultimately reflect their attitudes, responses of beginners who intend to stay in social sciences were compared to responses of students that were completing their undergraduate cycle. The objective was to determine whether such students already shared the tendency of more advanced students to promote external causes for social events. Two interpretations were proposed to explain potential differences: self-selection, where individuals choose disciplines that reflect to their own prior attitudes (in which case, no differences should be observed) and socialization, where attitudes of individuals gradually evolve to conform the belief system promoted in their discipline. Contrary to the selection hypothesis, beginners in social sciences, even those who are satisfied with their disciplinary choice, emphasize less external explanations for social events than advanced students. Thus, these results argue that causal attributions are affected by socialization.

Causal attributions and sociopolitical activism

This study also analyzed the relationship between intuitive explanation for personal and social events and sociopolitical activism.

Source: shutterstock

No relationship is observed between how individuals explain personal events and sociopolitical activism. However, explanation of social events is related to activism for advanced students in social sciences. Here, the more individuals explain unemployment and poverty by internal factors (e.g., laziness), the less they sign petitions or participate in public protests (e.g., street marches, strike).

In conclusion, this research shows that explanations of personal events by internal causes (i.e., personality, talent, determination) are not necessarily related to explanations of social events by internal causes. In fact, if social science studies reinforce externality regarding the explanation of social events, it simultaneously causes greater internality concerning the explanation of the personal events. Furthermore, sociopolitical activism is more related to the way individuals explain social facts than personal facts.

References

Beauvois, J., & Dubois, N. (1988). The norm of internality in the explanation of psychological events. European Journal of Social Psychology, 18(4), 299-316.

Guimond, S. (1995). Niveau d’analyse dans l’étude des explications causales: Implications théoriques et socio-politiques. Revue Internationale de Psychologie Sociale / International Review of Social Psychology, 8(1), 29-51.

Guimond, S., & Palmer, D. L. (1990). Type of academic training and causal attributions for social problems. European Journal of social psychology, 20(1), 61-75.

Heider, F. (1958). The psychology of interpersonal relations. New York, NY: John Wiley. 

Related topics, in the IRSP

Dompnier, B., & Pansu, P. (2010). Norme d'internalité et unités d'analyse: pour une redéfinition du statut de la mesure dans l'étude des normes sociales de jugement. Revue Internationale de Psychologie Sociale / International Review of Social Psychology, 23(4), 63-89.

Scheidegger, R., Clémence, A., & Staerklé, C. (2010). Ancrage de la légitimité économique dans les filières académiques: une approche représentationnelle de la socialisation et de l'autosélection. Revue internationale de psychologie sociale, 23(1), 111-142.

Scheidegger, R., & Tüscher, T. (2012). Who is responsible for the crisis? Perceived self-efficacy in politics and economics and attitudes towards the market economy. Revue Internationale de Psychologie Sociale / International Review of Social Psycholog, 24(4), 5-21.

From the same author, in the IRSP

Buschini, F., Guimond, S., & Breakwell, G. M. (2010). Social issues and social psychology: Distinctive pathways in applying social psychology to resolve major social problems. Revue Internationale de Psychologie Sociale / International Review of Social Psychology, 23(2), 5-15.

Dambrun, M., & Guimond, S. (2001). The theory of relative deprivation and hostility towards North Africans. Revue Internationale de Psychologie Sociale / International Review of Social Psychology, 14(1), 57-89.

Dambrun, M., Guimond, S., & Michinov, N. (2003). Les composantes automatique et contrôlée des préjugés ethniques. Revue internationale de psychologie sociale / International Review of Social Psychology, 16(1), 71-96.

De Oliveira, P., Dambrun, M., & Guimond, S. (2008). L'effet de la dominance sociale sur les idéologies de légitimation: le rôle modérateur de l'environnement normatif. Revue internationale de psychologie sociale / International Review of Social Psychology, 21(4), 115-150.

Duarte, S., Dambrun, M., & Guimond, S. (2004). La dominance sociale et les" mythes légitimateurs": Validation d'une version française de l'échelle d'orientation à la dominance sociale. Revue internationale de psychologie sociale / International Review of Social Psychology, 17(4), 97-126.