An empirical examination of Weiner's critique of attribution research

Evaluates 3 of the allegations of error made by B. Weiner about methodological pitfalls in attributional research. The present authors contend that failure to confirm Weiner's predictions occurred because of theoretical shortcomings inherent in his model rather than because of procedural limitations in testing it. The path analysis of the cognitive model of achievement motivation study of the present authors was replicated using undergraduates dissatisfied by their midterm examinations. The time interval for retest was lengthened from 2 days to 3 wks. Results show that disconfirmation of Weiner's prediction occurred irrespective of which expectancy measure (expectancy or expectancy change) or which behavioral criterion was employed. Expansion of the cognitive model to include additional affective variables (humiliation, guilt, and shame reactions) were useful in understanding the role of effort cognitions in eliciting failure-induced affect. (46 ref)