Miller R L, Brickman P, Bolen D
J Pers Soc Psychol. 1975 Mar;31(3):430-41. doi: 10.1037/h0076539.
The present research compared the relative effectiveness of an attribution strategy with a persuasion strategy in changing behavior. Study 1 attempted to teach fifth graders not to litter and to clean up after others. An attribution group was repeatedly told that they were neat and tidy people, a persuasion group was repeatedly told that they should be neat and tidy, and a control group received no treatment. Attribution proved considerably more effective in modifying behavior. Study 2 tried to discover whether similar effects would hold for a more central aspect of school performance, math achievement and self-esteem, and whether an attribution of ability would be as effective as an attribution of motivation. Repeatedly attributing to second graders either the ability or the motivation to do well in math proved more effective than comparable persuasion or no-treatment control groups, although a group receiving straight reinforcement for math problem-solving behavior also did well. It is suggested that persuasion often suffers because it involves a negative attribution (a person should be what he is not), while attribution generally gains because it disguises persuasive intent.
本研究比较了归因策略和说服策略在改变行为方面的相对有效性。研究1试图教导五年级学生不要乱扔垃圾,并在他人乱扔后进行清理。一个归因组被反复告知他们是整洁的人,一个说服组被反复告知他们应该保持整洁,而一个对照组则不接受任何处理。结果表明,归因在改变行为方面要有效得多。研究2试图探究对于学校表现的一个更核心方面——数学成绩和自尊,类似的效果是否依然成立,以及能力归因是否会与动机归因一样有效。结果证明,反复向二年级学生归因数学成绩优秀的能力或动机,比类似的说服组或不接受处理的对照组更有效,不过一个因解决数学问题行为而直接得到强化的组也表现良好。研究表明,说服往往效果不佳,因为它涉及负面归因(一个人应该成为他并非的样子),而归因通常效果良好,因为它掩盖了说服意图。