Activity 7 - Fundamental Attributions ErrorHide Details
Availability:Item is not available.
Enabled:Statistics Tracking
1. Introduction:
The objective of this video is to introduce students to the fundamental attribution error and its implications. One implication is that we often have a tendency to judge others unfairly because we do not take into account the situational factors that may have caused them to make unethical decisions. We jump to the conclusion that they are bad people because they did a bad thing. That said, it is important to remember that situational factors are usually explanations for while people err, they are not excuses. The best way to avoid this error, experts say, it to put ourselves in the shoes of others and try to envision the pressures they might have faced.
The other implication of the fundamental attribution error is that we may be too easy on ourselves, if we are not careful. We may too readily find situational factors, organizational pressures and the like and then simply excuse our own conduct.
The fundamental attribution error is the tendency to attribute -causes of behavior to actors (i.e., internal, dispositional factors) rather than the situation (i.e., external, environmental factors.- We see that other people have done bad things, and we assume that it is because of their character rather than the fact that they were, perhaps, striving so hard to please their superiors that they did not even notice the ethical issue that they flubbed.
According to some psychologists, the other side of the coin from the fundamental attribution error is the actor-observer bias which is people’s tendency to over-emphasize the role of the situation in their own behaviors. They insist there’s nothing wrong with their character, because their errors are accounted for by some situational factor—the boss’s pressure, the need to feed their families, etc.
Francesca Gino writes: -In particular, one mistake we systematically make is known as the correspondence bias. When making attributions as we evaluate others, we tend to ascribe too little influence to the situation and too much to their dispositions. In simpler terms, we tend to believe that people’s behavior reflects their unique dispositions and skills, when many times it actually reflects aspects of the situation in which they find themselves.- This sounds a lot like a different name for the fundamental attribution error.
2. Task – Watch the videos:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mDhiyPAD6NQ
3. Activities:
1. If you met a famous white-collar criminal, what would you expect him (or, occasionally, her) to be like?
2. Why do you think it is so common to hear white collar criminals described by their neighbors as -the nicest guy,- -a real family man,- etc.?
3. Can you think of things that you have done in the past that you wish you hadn’t and that you do not believe represent your true character?
4. How can we endeavour to judge people’s character more accurately?
Activity 6 - FramingHide Details
Availability:Item is not available.
Enabled:Statistics Tracking
1. Introduction
Written and Narrated by Professor Robert Prentice
In any kind of decision-making, context counts. The simple reframing of a situation or question can produce a totally different answer from the same person. For example, people would rather buy a hamburger made of meat labeled 75% fat free than meat labeled 25% fat. In fact, when questioned, these people will tell you that the 75% fat-free burger tastes better than the 25% fat burger, even though the burgers are identical.
When NASA was deciding whether to launch the ill-fated space shuttle Challenger, Morton Thiokol’s engineers at first opposed the launch on safety grounds. But when their general manager instructed the engineers to -put on their management hats,- he reframed the decision from one focusing on safety to one focusing on dollars and cents. The engineers then unfortunately changed their decision.
We need to look beyond the obvious frame of reference in business – -will this be a profitable decision?- – and consider our actions from a broader perspective like -how will this look when it’s reported on the front page of the newspaper?-
Decisions made by business people often occur in a context where subjective factors predominate, and the framing of an issue is particularly influential. In Enron’s declining days, the company attempted to save money by encouraging employees to minimize travel expenses. An Enron employee later wrote that he intentionally flouted the new policy. While this seems like a clear ethical lapse, in the employee’s mind, he deserved to stay in the most expensive hotels and to eat at the best restaurants because of how very hard he was working. He framed the issue in terms of his narrow self-serving interests, not in the broader ethical context of adhering to company policy.
CFOs and accounting personnel at Enron, HealthSouth, and other scandal-ridden companies didn’t need a philosophy course to help them figure out that their manipulation of financial statements was unethical. Their problem was that at the time of their actions, their frame of reference was loyalty to the company and to the company’s goal of maximizing stock price. Had those employees been able to think in terms of the bigger ethical picture – for example, the impact of their actions on other people’s pension funds – they might have acted differently.
2. Task – Watch the following Video
http://ethicsunwrapped.utexas.edu/video/framing


3. Activities:
Studies show that people primed to think about business profits will make different choices than people facing the same decision who have been primed to think about acting ethically. Can you explain how that might affect you in your work life?
Can you think of a situation where you made a decision that you regret and probably would have chosen differently had you looked at the choice in a different way?
How do politicians and advertisers use framing to channel people’s decision?
How might framing adversely affect your ethical decision making in your projected workplace?
How can you work to ensure that ethical considerations stay in your frame of reference when you make decisions in your career and your life?