If it is difficult to believe it or identify it in others and not in us, there is a natural tendency to apply a double standard to explain its behavior and that of others. Humans tend to emphasize the influence of the situation in explaining its behavior. However, in explaining the behavior of others, the situation is reversed: we tend to inform and criticize their behavior and attitudes.
Thus, we see in ourselves how decisive the situation can be, especially when we get negative results; however, we do not act the same way when we judge the other.
- This may sound funny about the childish idea.
- But it’s a fact we’re not normally aware of.
- We’re talking about a silent bias.
- This is what we call the actor-observer effect in psychology.
- We don’t do it on purpose.
- The most plausible explanation is that we have different perspectives when we act than when we observe.
- That is.
- What we know and feel is unique to each point of view.
- And this determines how we generate explanations.
We know that we do not always act in the same way and that we are sensitive to circumstances, but when others act in a certain way, we have no information, or less information, of whether they always act like this or not.
In addition, when we act, our focus is on the situation. When the other person acts, our attention is on the person; this is called a “fundamental attribution error. “That’s why perspective is changing.
These kinds of explanations are very curious when taken to specific contexts, such as relationships, social psychology has been studying this topic for a long time and the results obtained can make us think twice before explaining the behaviors of the other or ours.
Some studies show us that the tendency we have to explain our behavior or that of our partner will depend more on whether or not we feel comfortable in the relationship than in real reasons, it seems to be quite common, when the relationship does not work well, to attribute conflicts to the behavior of our partner, not the other way around.
Finchan and Bradbury’s research indicates that if the relationship is satisfactory, we justify our partner’s positive behaviors based on internal and controllable causes; similarly, their negative behaviors are attributed to external and uncontrollable causes.
The funny thing happens when our relationship is not going well: we have completely reversed the attributions. When our relationship is not good, we attribute the positive behaviors of our partners to external causes and the negative ones to internal causes.
It is also curious to note the phenomenon that occurs when explanations are given about more or less homogeneous groups, these social groups or phenomena may be poverty, racial discrimination or unemployment, basically what we apply subconsciously to explain these phenomena has more to do with our values, ideas and political affiliation than with reality.
The explanations we give about the behavior of others when we include them in a group will depend largely on our distance from the group, members of the same group perceive their members with much more positive responsibilities than those who are not.
Studies in the UK (Furhan and Reicher) have shown that the explanations given to negative social phenomena, such as poverty or wealth, are different for supporters of conservative politics than for those close to more liberal policies. The same goes for explanations of the facts, which have a great social impact, such as revolts or demonstrations.
Thus, people with conservative ideals praise savings and hard work as the main characteristics of the rich; however, people with more liberal ideals see people with great economic power as cruel and ruthless.
When we speak of poverty, people of liberal ideology explain it as a consequence of the inequality of resources and opportunities. However, conservatives try to explain it in terms of the consequence of a lack of interest and concern.
In the case of social turmoil, conservatives tend to give explanations based on pathological traits of protesters, yet liberals explain this because of the social circumstances that force protesters to speak.
With all this, we can say that the reality we perceive has much more to do with what we project than with the truth. Something to keep in mind when we want to explain the behavior of others.