Wollert R, Heinrich L, Wood D, Werner W
J Pers Soc Psychol. 1983 Nov;45(5):1029-44. doi: 10.1037//0022-3514.45.5.1029.
The causal-locus hypothesis (CLH) asserts that persons making internal attributions for failure and external attributions for success experience more negative postoutcome moods than persons making the opposite attributions. Three experiments assessed the CLH. Although outcomes consistently affected moods and attributions, attributions did not affect moods. Significant correlations consistent with the CLH were also infrequently obtained. Another theory, the sanctioned-object hypothesis (SOH), was proposed for understanding how causal attributions lead to mood changes. This hypothesis asserts that the application of positive or negative sanctions to objects in the perceptual field is a central determinant of mood and that attributions affect mood when their content and salience activate sanctioning processes. A fourth experiment evaluated the competing theories. The results supported the SOH but not the CLH. The findings are discussed in terms of their implications for understanding mood variations and the effects that moods have on the construction of attributions and for adopting methodological alternatives that may be valuable for future laboratory research studying mood variations.
因果 locus 假设（CLH）断言，将失败归因于内部因素而将成功归因于外部因素的人，比起做出相反归因的人，在结果出现后会体验到更消极的情绪。三项实验对 CLH 进行了评估。尽管结果始终会影响情绪和归因，但归因并未影响情绪。与 CLH 一致的显著相关性也很少得到。另一种理论，即认可对象假设（SOH），被提出来用于理解因果归因如何导致情绪变化。该假设断言，对感知领域中的对象施加正面或负面制裁是情绪的核心决定因素，并且当归因的内容和显著性激活制裁过程时，归因会影响情绪。第四个实验对这两种相互竞争的理论进行了评估。结果支持了 SOH 而非 CLH。将根据这些发现对理解情绪变化的意义、情绪对归因构建的影响以及采用可能对未来研究情绪变化的实验室研究有价值的方法替代方案进行讨论。
