This is the accepted version of the paper.This version of the publication may differ from the final published version.
Permanent repository link:http://openaccess.city.ac.uk/16691/ Link to published version: http://dx.doi.org/10. 1080/17470218.2016.1149498 Copyright and reuse: City Research Online aims to make research outputs of City, University of London available to a wider audience. Copyright and Moral Rights remain with the author(s) and/or copyright holders. URLs from City Research Online may be freely distributed and linked to.
University of Witten/Herdecke, GermanyThe corresponding author is Dr Tim Hopthrow t.hopthrow@kent.ac.uk 2
AbstractThe Correspondence Bias (CB) refers to the idea that people sometimes give undue weight to dispositional rather than situational factors when explaining behaviors and attitudes. Three experiments examined whether mindfulness, a non-judgmental focus on the present moment, could reduce the CB. Participants engaged in a brief mindfulness exercise (the raisin task), a control task or an attention to detail task before completing a typical CB measure involving an attitude-attribution paradigm. The results indicated that participants in the mindfulness condition experienced a significant reduction in the CB compared to participants in the control or attention to detail conditions. These results suggest that mindfulness training can play a unique role in reducing social biases related to person perception.
Keywords: Correspondence Bias, Mindfulness, Fundamental Attribution Error
3
MINDFULNESS REDUCES THE CORRESPONDENCE BIASIndividuals sometimes overlook the constraints of the situation and attend to dispositional attributes when judging the cause of others' behavior, a tendency known as the correspondence bias (CB; Haney & Zimbardo, 2009;Gawronski, 2004;Gilbert & Malone, 1995;Ross, 1977). In short, people have a tendency to think others are how they act. For example, when a person steps in front of us while we are walking, we might initially think he/she is "rude" rather than "rushing to the hospital". This error can have important consequences, as perceivers are more likely to react negatively toward people whom they directly blame for their actions (Alicke, 2000).Jones and Harris (1967) used an attitude attribution paradigm in one of the first studies to examine the CB. They wrote two speeches, one speech that was 'pro' Fidel Castro, and a second speech that was 'anti' Fidel Castro. Participants were informed they that were required to read one of the two speeches, and that the speeches had been written by fellow students. Subsequently, participants were required to rate the speechwriter's attitude toward Castro. Unsurprisingly, the researchers found that participants' rating of the speechwriter's attitude toward Castro corresponded to the speech position (pro or anti). Importantly, this occurred even when the participant was informed that a debate coach had chosen the position that the speechwriter wrote from. In other words, participants tended to overlook the situatio...