To illustrate the concept known as attribution theory, Hewstone and Antaki (1988) discuss a study undertaken by Duncan (1976). In Duncan’s study, white students were asked to watch a videotaped argument in which one participant pushed the other. Despite the fact that Duncan varied the race of those involved in the argument, i.e., between victim and protagonist, the results showed a clear effect for race.
When the protagonist was black, subjects said that the violent behaviour was due to personal characteristics of the harm-doer; when the protagonist was white, on the other hand, subjects ‘explained away’ the behaviour in terms of the situation. (Hewstone and Antaki, 1988:111)
The variation in the students’ descriptions shows how the race of the protagonist influenced their response, and suggests that responses to fictional
is apparent in Rhys’ response to Jane’s point of view in Jane Eyre, noted above. Insights from attribution theory therefore allow another dimension to be added to the reader side of the reading equation. Interpretations of events may vary depending upon whether the perceiver of those events sees the cause to be located within the person who is performing the action, termed a ‘person attribution’, or whether the cause of the behaviour may be attributed to external forces, termed a ‘situation attribution’. The concept is known as ‘correspondent inference theory’;
People try to infer from an action whether the action itself corresponds to an enduring personal characteristic of the actor [ ... ]
(Brehm and Kassin, 1996:91)
Person attributions can be divided into two stages; firstly, the perceiver decides whether or not the actor knows the consequences of that action, thus making an
‘attribution of intention’; secondly, the perceiver compares that action with what other people might be expected to do in similar circumstances, known as an ‘attribution of dispositions’. Dispositions are ‘stable characteristics such as personality traits, attitudes and abilities’ (Brehm and Kassin, 1996:90). Such inferences are made when the perceiver has information from multiple sources, known as the ‘co-variation principle’ (Kelley, 1973).
In order to infer whether or not a behaviour is due to a disposition of the actor, the perceiver evaluates the behaviour according to a) the degree of free choice the actor is perceived to have, b) how expected the action is, and c) the consequences of that action. The more unusual an action is perceived to be, the more confident the perceiver may feel about making a person attribution against the actor, known as the ‘non-common effects principle’. The more socially undesirable an action is, the more negative the person attribution will be accordingly.
56
In order to illustrate these points, I will attempt to show how attribution theory might explain the way in which we build up an impression of fictional characters, making inferences about their ‘personalities’ as a result of their ‘actions’. I have noted that the characterisation of Marcia in Quartet in Autumn as ‘eccentric’ is partly a result of her unusual actions. Marcia’s hobbies include collecting milk bottles and saving plastic bags, and her favourite activity is her regular check-up with the surgeon who performed her mastectomy. Her ‘relationship’ with him is so important to her that she even stands outside his home, observing his house from the outside. In accordance with correspondent inference theory, we might conclude that Marcia’s actions are a) freely chosen, and b) unexpected, thus reinforcing the impression of her as eccentric, and resulting in a person attribution (i.e., she is an eccentric ‘person’). However, the degree to which we perceive her actions to be involuntary, a result of her illness, may persuade us to attribute blame to the situation, and exonerate Marcia of the
responsibility of her actions (i.e., she behaves in an eccentric way because of her situation). The distinction between these two attributions is the distinction between person and situation attributions, sometimes referred to as ‘internal’ and ‘external’ attributions respectively. Our perception of Marcia’s degree of choice, and the expectedness of her actions is potentially variable from reader to reader. While her behaviour may be perceived to be unusual, the degree to which it might be expected, depends upon our perception of the effects of an illness such as cancer upon the mind.
The third aspect, relating to the effects or consequences of an action, refers to the outcome for the actor. An action which has many desirable outcomes is less informative than an action which has only one.
For example, you are likely to be uncertain about exactly why a person stays on (sic) a job that is enjoyable, high paying, and in an attractive location - three desirable outcomes, each sufficient to explain the behaviour. In contrast,
you may feel more certain about why a person stays on a job that is tedious and low paying but in an attractive location - only one desirable outcome.
(Brehm and Kassin, 1996:92)
Marcia’s actions have several desirable outcomes for Marcia personally. Her visits to the surgeon, both prescribed and voluntary, are reassuring to her, as is her compulsive collecting of bags and milk bottles; they appear to instil in her a sense of control over her physical environment which is sadly lacking with regard to her physical well-being. However, her actions are socially undesirable for her neighbour, Priscilla, who worries about the effect of Marcia’s behaviour on her own social life, in particular, how Marcia’s neglected garden might prevent Priscilla from entertaining. In the extract below, Priscilla is observing Marcia, who is digging in the garden in an effort to find her cat’s grave.
All the same, one could perhaps offer a little gardening assistance, digging, for example.. .but not now, when Priscilla had people coming to dinner, the avocado to prepare and mayonnaise to make. Perhaps it was a fine enough evening to have drinks on the little patio they had made, but the view of the neglected garden next door would detract from the elegance of the occasion, and if Miss Ivory was going to go on digging in this disturbing way something would have to be done about it.
(Pym, Quartet in Autumn, p. 116)
The combination of a) choice, b) expectedness and c) consequences, in Marcia’s case, tells us that her behaviour is most likely a result of her illness rather than a stable personality trait, and may cause us to excuse her behaviour. However, the consequences of her actions result in negative person attributions from Priscilla and other characters. The difference between these two types of attributions can be explained as a result of the informational differences between narrator/narratee, and character/character; the characters are only able to judge Marcia according to her actions, whereas the reader has access to the state of her mind and hence the
58
intentions, and attributions of dispositions, the reader might conclude that Marcia’s actions are intentional, but that she does not appreciate the consequences of those actions. For the other characters, her actions are seen as intentional, and lead to the inference that they are a result of personal dispositions; she is ‘eccentric’. In both cases, the first stage (attribution of intention) may well lead to the correspondent inference (attribution of disposition) i.e., ‘Marcia is eccentric’; however, the implied reader may be less inclined to make a negative person attribution than are the other characters.
To illustrate these three aspects more clearly, I will now turn to the characterisation of Letty in more detail. I noted above that of the two women characters, Letty is the more stereotypical and predictable, although both she and Marcia are ‘round’ characters. The impression of roundness in Letty’s case is partly achieved by a sense that in many ways, Letty typifies the characteristics of some people of her age and era, including their views and attitudes (although, as noted above, person schemata are often distorted). For these reasons, Letty’s
characterisation is believable, and confirms what we expect from a ‘person’ like her. Letty rents a room from her landlady, Mrs Embrey, who summons the tenants to a meeting to inform them that that she is retiring. Letty’s new landlord is Jacob Olatunde, a Nigerian priest, who moves into the house with his extended family. Finding the friendliness and hymn-singing of the Olatunde’s ‘disturbing’ (Pym, Quartet in Autumn, p. 56), Letty chooses to leave her lodgings in favour of a rented room in the house o f an elderly woman church-goer, Mrs. Pope. Mrs. Pope’s house is, in Letty’s opinion, ‘bleak and silent’ (Pym, Quartet in Autumn, p.64), in contrast to Letty’s former lodgings. Knowing that Letty’s actions are voluntary, the implied reader infers certain things about Letty’s ‘personality’. Firstly, we might infer that
Letty’s choice is a result of her desire to disassociate herself from the friendly
Nigerians, due to an inherent racism which is in keeping with the stereotypical image of a white, single, elderly female o f mid nineteen-seventies Britain. Letty’s choice is, however, also linked to the second aspect of correspondent inference theory, i.e., the ‘expectedness’ of Letty’s actions. Finding herself the last of the tenants to seek alternative accommodation, Letty, as a single woman, feels it would be inappropriate to remain in the house with Mr. Olatunde and his family. Her decision to seek alternative accommodation in Mrs. Pope’s house is more in keeping with Letty’s role as retired spinster. Letty’s choice is, in this respect, partly constrained, a result of the expectations of her social role as she perceives them.
The third aspect, namely, the effects or consequences of an action, helps to reinforce the poignancy of Letty’s characterisation. Letty’s existence in her new rented room is a meagre one in which the days drag, and she is lonely and bored, a situation which is contrasted with the potential ‘family’ which she has rejected in the Olatunde household. The reader is invited to compare the consequences of Letty’s actions with an alternative; remaining in the Olatunde household might have had several desirable outcomes, company, entertainment and warmth. This choice of action is rejected in favour of one which has only one desirable outcome (in Letty’s opinion), namely, respectability. Letty’s choice implies that Letty favours
respectability over companionship, and we infer something about her ‘personality’, i.e., that she is perhaps reserved, a personality trait which is in keeping with her characterisation as ‘spinster’.
My discussion of Marcia’s and Letty’s characterisation has attempted to show how we can use these three aspects of correspondent inference theory to build up an impression of characters’ ‘personalities’. The characterisation of Letty as stereotypical
60
‘spinster’ is confirmed by her choice of actions and its degree of expectedness; the outcome of her action and its comparison with the one rejected however highlights the poignancy of her decision, of which Letty herself is aware.
My discussion so far has referred to the ‘behaviour’ of Letty and Marcia, and has also alluded to the fact that Marcia’s actions might be judged differently by the implied reader than by the other characters. I noted above that we do not judge the behaviour of others in isolation, but compare their behaviour with that of others in similar situations. Kelley (1973) refers to this as the co-variation principle, and suggests that we make use of three types of information, namely, consensus, consistency and distinctiveness information. I will exemplify these again with
reference to Letty’s characterisation. We might compare Letty’s behaviour with those of others, for example; not everyone might have made the same decision as Letty, although some might. The degree to which people react to the same stimulus is termed consensus information, and would apply to a situation in which everyone reacted to the arrival of the Olatunde family in the same way as Letty. This is a point which Letty herself ponders;
She wondered what Edwin and Norman and Marcia would have done in the circumstances, but came to no conclusions. Other people’s reactions were unpredictable and while she could imagine Edwin entering into the religious aspect of the evening and even taking part in the service, it might well be that Norman and Marcia, usually so set in their isolation, would in some surprising way have been drawn into the friendly group. Only Letty remained outside.
(Pym, Quartet in Autumn, p.57)
The fact that the other three female tenants in Letty’s lodgings also find
alternative accommodation following the arrival of the Olatunde family may lead us to infer that there is nothing unique about Letty’s behaviour. However, we might differ in our perception of the reasons for those actions; is it due to the fact that a) all the tenants are racist? or b) that they are all single women? We are only provided with
consensus information which allows us to infer that something about the change of circumstances persuades them to leave.
In Letty’s case however, information which is provided at other times allows us to infer that in fact Letty rejects most forms of human contact. In this respect, her behaviour is consistent; her discomfort in the Olatunde household is partly due to her apparent inability to relate to others, and she consistently rejects most forms of contact. Our interpretation of Letty’s behaviour illustrates the fact that we are sometimes better able to evaluate the behaviour of fictional characters; although Letty’s actions might imply that she is racist, the insight into her mind, only available to us because this is a work of fiction, allows us to infer that she is reserved and unable to relate well to others. We are thus provided with information which allows us to interpret aspects of Letty’s behaviour as distinctive; distinctiveness information is that information which tells us how the same person reacts to different entities. Letty avoids contact with everyone, not just with the Olatunde family, and in this respect her behaviour is unlike that of most other people.
The different types of information (consensus, consistency and distinctiveness) thus allow us to re-evaluate our opinion of Letty’s ‘personality’. Her actions could be construed as evidence of a racist attitude, since the people around her react in a similar way. We could therefore view this as ‘consensus’ information, since everyone
responds to the change of landlord by moving home. However, the insight into Letty’s mind provides us with consistency and distinctiveness information, since Letty
behaves like this with everyone, not just with her landlord, and she is therefore different from most others. We can thus make a correspondent inference that Letty is cold and reserved perhaps, rather than racist per se. The extent to which we blame Letty for her actions, thus making a ‘person attribution’ against her, or see her actions
62
to be a result of the situation in which she find herself (i.e., a ‘situation attribution’) may vary from reader to reader. The text does imply however that Letty herself is to blame for her own situation. For example, in the early stages of the novel, Letty rejects the friendly overtures of another woman in a cafe;
It was too late for any kind of gesture. Once again Letty had failed to make contact. (Pym, Quartet in Autumn, p.7)
Kelley’s co-variation principle thus describes situations where we have information from multiple sources. In fictional terms, this might also be compared with a narrative which utilises several different narrators or points of view. In Burney’s Evelina, the rudeness which is attributed to Evelina’s behaviour at the ball by those who do not know her, as described above, is a result of the fact that her behaviour is seen as ‘distinctive’ and is evaluated negatively. In the interpretation of the male characters present, Evelina’s intentional bad manners result in a person attribution against her, i.e., ‘she is rude’. By contrast, the reader attributes Evelina’s behaviour to inexperience, and infers that Evelina’s rudeness is not a characteristic of hers, but is in fact unintentional and is due to the fact that she has never attended a ball before (i.e., a situation attribution). Evelina’s version of the events which happen to her are corroborated by letters from other (usually older and more knowledgeable)
characters offering slightly different perspectives, which nevertheless support the impression of Evelina’s innocence and naivete. While Evelina’s narration of her distress at her involuntary rudeness is one source of information which the reader uses to form an impression of her character, other ‘narrators’ provide further sources. For
example, the Reverend Villars’ letters to his niece comment on her behaviour, and offer advice for her future conduct, reinforcing the reader’s perception o f her ‘personality’, as in the example below.
Alas, my child, the artlessness of your nature, and the simplicity of your education, alike unfit you for the thorny paths of the great and busy world.
(Burney, Evelina, p. 116)
The multiple sources of information (different points of view) therefore reinforce the impression of Evelina as an ‘innocent abroad’, allowing the reader to infer that it is the situation in which she finds herself, rather than her ‘personality’, which is responsible for Evelina’s ‘rude’ behaviour.
Kelley describes an alternative situation in which our interpretation of an actor’s behaviour is based on information from a single observation, but which takes into account a configuration of factors. The distinction between these two types of information, (i.e., co-variation and configuration), is the difference between the information available to the reader of Evelina, and to the other characters at the ball; the reader has information from a number of sources which accumulate into an
impression of Evelina’s ‘personality’ (co-variation), whereas the other characters have only this one occasion (configuration).
Evelina’s behaviour results in a person attribution against her on the part of the men; she is ‘ignorant or mischievous’ (Burney, Evelina, p.36). In addition, her
rudeness is seen to be a characteristic of the social group to which she belongs; the fact that she is a ‘country parson’s daughter’ (Burney, Evelina, p.35) means that she is seen to conform to society’s expectations of her (i.e., ‘society’ in Burney’s time); country people are expected to lack social manners. Evelina is thus seen to be