The relationship between dimensions of self-attribution and dimensions of self-concept

A literature review is used to clarify the distinction between dispositional and situational approaches to attribution research and to outline particular issues that are important for the study of individual differences in self-attributions. These issues are examined in relation to results obtained from 248 5th graders on the Self-Description Questionnaire and a new self-attribution measure, the Sydney Attribution Scale, that assesses students' attributions of their success or failure in different academic areas. Conclusions based on the literature review and empirical findings both demonstrate that (a) individual differences in self-attributions cannot be explained in terms of the bipolar dimensions that have been found in research that manipulates situational components of the attribution process (e.g., the internal-external, stable-unstable, and controlled-uncontrollable dimensions); (b) attributions for success and failure outcomes differ in ways that have not been recognized by attributional theorists; and (c) ability attributions, but perhaps not attributions to effort and external causes, are specific to particular areas of academic content. Results also demonstrate a clear and predictable pattern of relationships between dimensions of self-attribution and self-concept that supports the convergent and discriminant validity of responses in each of these areas. (66 ref)