the development of an occupational attributional style questionnaire

JOURNAL OF ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR, VOL. 13,27-39 (1992)

The development of an occupational at tr ibu t ional style questionnaire

ADRIAN FURNHAM AND VALDA SADKA

AND CHRIS R. BREWIN

Department of Psychology, University College London, U. K.

MRC Social and Community Psychiatry Unit, Institute of Psychiatry, London, UK

Summary Ninety working adults completed the OASQ - an occupational attributional style questionnaire aimed specifically at examining attributions for work-related events. They also completed well-known and validated measures of job satisfaction and intrinsic motivation. The OASQ was shown to have satisfactory internal reliability. Attributions for positive events, rather than negative events, were significantly correlated with demographic variables like occupational status and salary but also job satisfaction and motivation. The study supports previous work to the effect that an ‘optimistic’ internal attributional style at work is associated with satisfaction and motivation.

Introduction

Attributional style is a personality characteristic that was first introduced by Abramson, Seligman and Teasdale (1 978) and further elaborated by others (Metalsky, Abramson, Seligman, Semmel and Peterson, 1982; Peterson, Semmel, Van Baeyer, Abramson, Metalsky and Seligman, 1982; Seligman, Abramson, Semmel and Von Baeyer 1979). According to the reformulated learned helplessness model of depression (Abramson et af . , 1978) individuals vulnerable to depression differ from the non-vulnerable in the causal judgements they habitually make for the good and bad events, in their lives. Abramson et af. (1978) speculated that a ‘depressive attributional style’ is characterized by the tendency to view aversive events as caused by internal factors (in contrast to external factors, such as the environment or the actions of others); by factors that are stable (rather than unstable or temporary); and by factors that exert global influence across many domains in one’s life (rather than specific or narrow influence in only a few situations).

Seligman and his colleagues developed the Attributional Style Questionnaire (ASQ; Peterson et af., 1982) which presents subjects with 12 different hypothetical situations, half of which are interpersonal/affiliative in nature, while the other half are achievement-related - to allow for the possibility that attributional style for affiliative events is different from attributional style for achievement events as well as to build cross-situational generality. Within each class of situations there are three positive outcomes and three negative outcomes. Subjects are required

Reprint requests should be directed to Dr Adrian Furnham, Department of Psychology, University College London, 26 Bedford Way, London WCl, U.K.

0894-3796/92/0 10027-1 3$06.50 0 1992 by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Received 22 February I990 Revised 13 August 1990

28 A. FURNHAM, V . SADKA AND C. R. BREWIN

to imagine themselves in the situation described, write down one major cause of the outcome and then rate the cause on separate seven point scales for the three attributional dimensions of internality, stability and globality as well as the degree of importance of the situation. The ASQ has been mainly employed in studies of depression, although the causal relationship between attributions and depression is still unclear (Coyne and Gotlib 1983; Brewin, 1985).

Despite the documented importance of attributions in achievement motivation (Weiner, 1986), little attention has been paid to the role of attributional style in occupational settings. Indeed Weiner (1986) has developed a sophisticated theory of motivation and emotions that is based on the kind of attributions people make for personal success and failures. One exception is the work of Seligman and Schulman (1986). Utilizing a sample of 94 experienced life insurance sales agents who as a result of their job repeatedly encounter failure, rejection and indifference from prospective clients, Seligman and Schulman tested whether explanatory style predicts work productivity and quitting. They found, as predicted, that individuals who saw failure as internal, stable, and global initiated fewer sales attempts, were less persistent, produced less, and quit more frequently than those with a more optimistic explanatory style. The results showed that agents who had an optimistic explanatory style on the ASQ sold 37 per cent more insurance in their first two years of service than those with a pessimistic style. Agents in the top decile sold 88 per cent more insurance than those in the bottom decile. In a prospective one-year study of 103 newly hired agents, individuals who had an optimistic explanatory style when hired remained in their job twice as long and sold more insurance than agents with a more pessimistic explanatory style,

The theoretical significance of these findings is that they support the reformulation’s claim that a bad explanatory (or pessimistic) style predisposes people to poor performance, and poor performance is then triggered by failure in those individuals with the predisposing style. The interaction of the two components increases the likelihood of helplessness deficits, here operationalized by quitting and poor productivity. These results suggest that a depressogenic explanatory style predicts performance deficits in a work setting, beyond the clinical syndrome of depression, wherein it has more often been tested.

Other evidence supporting the likely importance of attributional style in occupational settings comes from studies of locus of control, which has strong theoretical links with the concept of attributional style (Brewin, 1988). Spector (1982), in a review paper, proposed locus of control as an important variable for the explanation of human behavior in organizations. He noted that locus of control is related to motivation. effort, performance, satisfaction, perception of the job, compliance with authority, and supervisory style, as well as being an important modera- tor between incentive and motivation and satisfaction and turnover. For example, internals tend to respond to reinforcement contingencies (incentive systems) on the job, they seem to prefer participative supervision, they demonstrate initiative, and they tend to take personal action on the job. Externals on the other hand seem unresponsive to incentives (they want them but will not necessarily work harder for them) and prefer directive supervision. Externals also comply more with demands of coercive supervisors and tend to bc more compliant with social demands than internals. O’Brien (1984) also reviewed the expanding work in the field noting the increase in multi-dimensional locus of control measures. In the national longitudinal study of 2972 employed individuals, Andrisani and Nestel (1976) examined the influence of internal-external control on a number of facets of work experience. The data suggested that internals are in the better and higher status occupations, earn more money, and tend to be more highly satisfied in their work than comparable externals. Frantz (1980) considered the influence of some personal and labor market factors on the internal locus of control among young male American workers. He found that increases in hourly earnings, additional labor

OCCUPATIONAL ATTRIBUTIONAL STYLE QUESTIONNAIRE 29

market experience and a larger number of years of formal schooling increase feelings of internal control.

Both laboratory and field studies have thus established that the behavior of internals and externals can differ across work-related situations (Lester and Genz, 1978; Roark, 1978; Singh, 1978). The literature at present contains strong evidence that job motivation, operationalized in terms of effort and task orientation, will appear to be higher in internals (Hammar and Vardi, 1981).

Hartley (1976) in measuring I-E, achievement motivation and job satisfaction, found that the combination of both personality variables was related to satisfaction, although achievement motivation alone was not. These results suggest that locus of control and achievement motivation are in fact distinct concepts that may in some cases be related to the same variables.

All of the above studies in organizational behavior have used generalized locus of control scales which have focused on the one dimension of internalityxxternality. No attempts have been made to tailor scale content specifically to organizational issues, nor have investigators tried to meet the criticisms that locus of control confounds the dimensions of internality and controllability (Weiner, 1986) and fails to consider positive and negative outcomes separately (Brewin and Shapiro, 1984). More importantly the attributional theories of Seligman and Weiner (and indeed others) suggested that people naturally make attributions (judgements of, as well as responsibility and blame) along a number of quite specific dimensions. Despite the fact there is some dispute about which are the most salient dimensions it is agreed that all measures should be multi-dimensional.

The thesis underlying a great deal of this research is that attribution style (locus of control belief) determines job-related behaviors (satisfaction/motivation). However reviewers of this burgeoning literature point out that attributions, and work-related behaviors are reciprocally determined so that positive experiences increase tendencies toward internal control, which in turn increase initiative and motivation for success (Hammar and Vardi, 1981; Spector, 1982). Also the relationship between attributions and job behaviors are moderated by objective aspects of the job (such as skill utilization) as well as the organizational structure. Attribution style and work-related behavior, are then reciprocally related and the relationship is moderated by other variables.

The present study considers a new measure of attributional style, the Occupational Attributionul Style Questionnaire (OASQ), that was designed to assess how a person makes causal attribution for occupational outcomes. Despite the development of numerous alternative measures of attributional style such as Russell’s (1982) Causal Dimension Scale and Feather’s (1983) Balanced Attributional Style Questionnaire, the OASQ is exceptional in that it describes hypothetical events which are specifically related to the work setting. Studies have shown that predictability is improved with specific sphere-related questions (Furnham and Procter, 1989). That is, the power of attributional style to predict behavior is dependent on the specificity and dimensionality of the attributes elicited. Most locus of control scales have become domain-specific and multi- dimensional and the OASQ can be seen as in this tradition. In addition the OASQ is multi- dimensional instrument, measuring nine dimensions of beliefs, found to be important in other areas (Bradley, Brewin, Gamsu and Moses, 1984; Brewin, 1988).

The first objective is to establish the reliability of the OASQ, looking specifically at the inter-item reliabilities of both positive and negative events. Secondly, we shall report validity in terms of the correlations of OASQ measures with other variables (e.g. job satisfaction, intrinsic job motivation and selected demographic characteristics.) It was predicted that a ‘healthy’ attributional style of internal, stable and global for positive events is associated with job success, motivation and satisfaction.

30 A. FURNHAM. V. SADKA AND C. R. BREWIN

Subjects Ninety subjects in full-time paid employment took part in the study, of which 53 were male and 37 female. They ranged in age from 18-64years, the mean age being 33.32 years (S.D. = 16.12). Most (59 per cent) were married but varied in how much education they had received; Education ranged from 10 to 23 years in full-time education (the mean being 12.88 years; S.D. = 14 years). Subjects varied in their occupational status, as they were drawn from all social classes and included milkmen and bricklayers to company directors. Their income ranged between under f5000 to over f25 000 per annum: With 30 per cent earning E5000-E10000,30 per cent between f10000-~15000 and 10 per cent over f25000 (the mean was f16500, S.D. El1 500). Subjects were also asked about their ethnic background, religion, town of residence, and whether they had recently been promoted or were ever unemployed. Although this was not a very large sample it was decided that it was representative enough of the working population to test the validity of the instrument.

Questionnaires and procedure The OASQ was closely modelled on both the ASQ in terms of its basic format, instruction and response scales, and a measure of perceived control of diabetes developed by Bradley et al. (1984) which incorporates various attributional dimensions not found in the ASQ (e.g. controllability and foreseeability).

The measure consists of 10 items that present brief descriptions of hypothetical situations which are commonly experienced by, or particularly relevant to, employed individuals. Five of the hypothetical events describe positive outcomes and five describe negative outcomes. The hypothetical events are presented in Table 1.

Table 1 . The hypothetical events used in this study

Positive outcomes Imagine that you apply for promotion and get it Imagine that you solve a major problem that has occurred a t work Imagine that you very successfully lead a group project with a positive outcome Imagine that you are voted as the most popular boss in your section Imagine that you are given a special performance reward at work

Imagine that you are turned down at a job interview Imagine that your boss always acts aggressively toward you Imagine that you can’t get all the work done that others expect of you Imagine that you gave an important talk in front of your colleagues and they react negatively Imagine that you are given a poor annual report by a superior

Negative outcomes

For each hypothetical event, respondents were asked to vividly imagine themselves in the situation, and to write down the single most likely cause of the event. They then rated this cause on nine separate seven-point scales concerned with internality, stability, probability, externality, chance, personal control, colleague control, foreseeability and importance respectively.


Scores on these nine scales consist of the mean of each person’s rating for the five positive and five negative events. The actual response scales are set out below.

1. To what extent was the cause due to something about you? Totally 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Notallme Due to me Due to me 2. In the future, at work, will this cause again influence what happens? Will never again influence what Will always influence what

happens happens 3. Is the cause something that just affects problem-solving or does it influence other

areas of your life? Influence just this situation Influencesallareasofmylife 4. To what extent was the cause something to do with other people or circumstances? Totally due to other people or Notat allduetootherpeopleor

circumstances circumstances 5. To what extent was the cause due to chance? Totally due to chance 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Notatallduetochance 6. To what extent was the cause controllable by you? Totally controllable by me 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 7. To what extent was the cause controllable by your colleagues? Totally controllable by my 6 5 4 3 2 1 0

8. To what extent do you think you could have foreseen the cause? Totally foreseeable by me 9. How important would the situation be if it happened to you? Not at all important

6 5 4 3 2 1 0

6 5 4 3 2 1 0

6 5 4 3 2 1 0

Not all controllable by me

Not at all controllable by my colleagues colleagues

6 5 4 3 2 1 0

6 5 4 3 2 1 0

Not at all foreseeable by me

Extremelyimportant

These events were based on other achievement-orientated, attribution style questionnaires and thought to be ‘typical’ of most everyday work situations. It may be that these events could be changed and tailored to the needs of each particular group completing the questionnaire as it requires only that the outcome is generally positive or negative and does not require they are set for all groups. The adjective aspect of the questionnaire could be seen as one of its major assets.

Overall job satisfaction (Brayfield and Rothe, 1951) This is an IS-item questionnaire chosen because of its psychometric properties. The authors reported an internal reliability of 0.87 though subsequent studies have shown an improved reliability coefficient. In a review of the use of this measure Cook, Hepworth, Wall and Warr (1981) have noted over 20 studies that have successfully used the questionnaire to measure job satisfaction. The Cronbach alpha in this study was 0.90.

Intrinsic job motivation (Warr, Cook and Wall, 1979) This is a short, six-item, robust scale designed to be completed easily by employees of modest educational attainment. The authors report a coefficient alpha of 0.82, and that the items load on a single factor. The measure has been shown to be significantly correlated with work involve- ment, and job satisfaction (Cook and Wall, 1980). The Cronbach alpha in this study was 0.72.

Subjects completed the questionnaire in their own time and handed them back to the experi- menters. In all 120 were handed out and 90 completed and useable questionnaires which is a 75 per cent return rate. The total questionnaire took about 30 minutes to complete. Those

32 A. FURNHAM, V. SADKA A N D C. R. BREWIN

people from working class jobs took considerably longer to complete it and expressed some difficulty. Subjects expressed considerable interest in the task and where possible were debriefed.

Internal reliability

The first requirement of any self-report measure is that it is shown to be reliable, particularly as this has been shown to be a problem with previous measures of attributional style.

Table 2. Means, S. D.’s and alpha’s for the nine scales

Attributions POSITIVE NEGATIVE COMBINED

X S.D. Abha X S.D. Aloha X S.D. Alvha

Internality Stability Globality Externality Chance Personal control Colleague control Foreseeability ImDortance

4.64 0.98 0.64 3.43 1.26 0.44 4.06 1.81 1.32 0.79 2.15 1.25 0.78 1.84 2.28 1.37 0.75 3.45 1.13 0.55 2.63 2.67 1.24 0.65 3.29 1.25 0.56 2.82 1.63 1.34 0.79 2.04 1.40 0.71 1.70 4.29 1.12 0.64 3.04 1.29 0.62 3.64 2.57 1.13 0.56 3.40 1.15 0.48 2.84 3.98 1.16 0.71 3.60 1.13 0.59 1.74 1.66 1.28 0.77 2.12 1.38 0.76 3.49

1.11 0.52 1.23 0.84 1.22 0.66 1.24 0.59 1.36 0.79 1.20 0.69 1.13 0.63 1.14 0.72 1.34 0.65

* p < 0.001 t p < 0.01. sp < 0.05.

Table 2 shows the Cronbach’s alphas for the nine scales. Interestingly internality and externality that had coefficient lower than 0.60 and few exceeded the ideal of 0.80. The others were satisfactory, though not particularly high, demonstrating some reliability of the OASQ. Poor reliability could be due to a number of things such as small sample size (the most likely cause); and using too few good and bad events. Peterson et al. (1982) noted that increasing the number of events on the ASQ increases reliabilities considerably. Test-retest reliability for 10 subjects over a four-week period yielded I’ = 0.87, which indicates a high level of stability.

Factor structure As there has been considerable debate about the basic dimensions associated with attributions a VARIMAX factor analysis was executed, to examine the factor of structure of the nine- dimensions.

Given the size of the N relative to the number of items it is probable that the factor solution was somewhat unstable. Hence that factor analysis was not used in any subsequent analyses. Table 3 shows that slightly different factors emerged from the factor analysis of the positive and negative attributions. Three factors accounting for nearly 80 per cent of the variance emerged from the positive attributions. The first factor refers to speczjic attribution - the idea that attributions were neither stable nor global, somewhat chance-related but important. The second


factor refers to internal attributions (internality, personal control and foreseeability). The third factor refers to external control through chance or powerful other attributions.

Table 3. VARIMAX analysis of the nine positive and negative attributions. Note that the stability and globaility dimension are coded in the direction of unstable and specific rather than global and stable

1 2 3 4 Factors

Positive 1. Internality 2. Stability 3. Globality 4. Externality 5. Chance 6. Personal control

-0.11 - 0.8 1 ~

-0.29 0.85 -0.13 0.19 0.77 -1.13 0.3 1 0.24 -0.22 0.81 0.56 -0.1 1 0.53 0.00 0.88 0.23

~

~ ~

7. Other control 0.16 -0.11 0.89 8. Foreseeability 9. Importance

-0.32 0.84

Eigenvalue Variance

Negative 1. Internality 2. Stability 3. Globality 4. Externality 5. Chance 6. Personal control

4.14 46.1%

-0.17 0.74 0.73 0.18 0.48 0.11

0.78 0.12

1.56 17.4%

-0.15 0.18 0.12 0.86 0.48

-0.22 ~

0.09 0.06

1.13 12.6%

0.90 0.08 0.19 -0.30 ~

-0.17 0.24 -0.23 -0.07

0.09 -0.48 0.87 0.12

__

7. Other control 0.01 0.88 -0.18 0.03 8. Foreseeability 9. Importance

Eigenvalue Variance

0.03 0.00 0.22 0.89 0.84 0.00 -0.06 0.04

~

3.02 2.85 1.08 1.04 33.6% 20.6% 12.0% 11.6%

The first factor of the negative items factor analysis was very similar to that resulting from the factor analysis of the positive items and concerned specijicity. The second factor, external was very similar to the third factor of the previous analysis and concerned external beliefs. The third factor emerging form the analysis of the negative attribution was clearly about internal control and the fourth concerned foreseeability. These four factors accounted for nearly 80 per cent of the variance. These factors are very similar to those emerging from Weiner’s (1986) study and suggest that fewer dimensions could be tested in the questionnaire. However for the sake of completeness the analysis will examine each of the nine attributions individually.

34 A. FURNHAM, V. SADKA AND C. R. BREWIN

Separate scores are therefore used as Peterson et a/ (1982) suggest which may indeed be better predictors of occupational behavior as they were found to be of depression.

Correlates T o ascertain construct validity positive, negative and combined attributions were correlated with various demographic variables. These are shown in Table 4.

Table 4. Correlations between demographic variables and attributional dimensions

Sex Occupational

.4ge Education status Salary

Positive 1. lnternality 2. Stability 3. Globality 4. Externality 5. Chance 6. Personal control 7 . Other control 8. Foreseeability 9. Importance

1. Internality 2. Stability 3. Globality 4. Externality 5. Chance 6. Personal control 7. Other control 8. Foreseeability 9. Importance

1. Internality 2. Stability 3. Globality 4. Externality 5. Chance 6. Personal control 7. Other control 8. Foreseeability 9. Importance

Negative

Combined

-0.18* 0.10 0.25t 0.11 0.11

-0.07 0.17* 0.08 0.18*

-0.18* 0.17*

-0.06 0.02

-0.04 0.05 0.02 0.04 0.04

-0.19* 0.08

-0.19* 0.04

-0.01 -0.05

0.04 0.06 0.12

-0.05 0.17*

-0.16 0.01 0.09 0.00 0.02 0.09 0.19*

-0.05 0.02 0.03

-0.10 -0.01 -0.261 - 0.08

0.01 0.04

0.01 0.02 0.04 0.07

-0.1 1 0.03 0.16

-0.08 0.00

-0.19* 0.17* 0.11

-0.10 0.12

-0.27* -0.12 -0.291. -0.02

0.10 0.08 0.09 0.10 0.12 0.10

-0.12 0.10 0.14

-0.14 0.19* 0.09 0.00 0.20*

-0.10 0.07

-0.311- 0.11

-0.17* 0.07 0.14 0.21* 0.15

-0.14 0.10

-0.241- 0.05

-0.07 0.16 0.16 0.11 0.13

-0.04 0.15

-0.10 0.10

0.06 0.10 0.13 0.261- 0.251-

-0.07 0.20*

-0.251- 0.12

0.241- - 0.08 -0.1 1 -0.251 -0.281-

-0.241-

-0.09

0.28t

0.32$

0.08 -0.1 1

0.15 -0.04

0.00 0.14

-0.13 0.28* 0.06

0.18* -0.1 1 -0.01 -0.22* -0.19*

0.26t -0.301-

0.39$ -0.00

~ __ _ _ ~

* p < 0.05 t p < O 0 1 $ p < 0.001.

It is evident from Table 4 that whilst sex, age and education showed few significant correlations, occupational status and salary were significantly related to numerous aspects of attributional style. Whereas many of the correlations were significant for the positive situations (and combined positive and negative situations) very few were significant for the negative situations. The attributional correlates of salary were most consistent and explicable: high salaries were positively correlated with internal, personal control and importance judgments but negatively correlated with external, chance and superior control attributions.


This finding (the salary-attribution style correlation) is clearly in accordance with what one might expect from Seligman’s attribution theory (Seligman et al. 1979; Seligman and Schulman, 1986).

Table 5 shows the partial correlations between attributional style, job satisfaction and intrinsic job motivation with age, sex, education, occupational status and salary partialled out. These were partialled out individually and then in combination and had the predictable effect of depressing the size of the correlations overall. Again the pattern of correlations is strongest for the positive, rather than the negative events. Eight of the nine attributions for positive events correlated with job satisfaction in the predicted direction. That is, job satisfaction was associated with internal, personal control and foreseeable attributions but negatively associated with unstable, specijic, external, chance and superior control attributions. Very much the same pattern emerged for intrinsic job motivation though it is probably worth pointing out that the correlations were somewhat higher, particularly for stability and importance. The size of the correlations seemed to suggest that attributional style accounted for about 10 per cent of the variances. It should be pointed out that the very number of correlations calculated, shown in Tables 4 and 5, means that the likelihood of type 1 error occurring does increase significantly.

About a third of the attributional dimensions for negative events correlated with job satisfaction and intrinsic motivation. Also the pattern was less clear with some attributions correlating significantly with satisfaction (internally, globality) but different ones with motivation (chance, importance). The pattern of correlations for the combined scores also showed an interesting pattern. Whilst only one (foreseeabi1ity)correlated with job satisfaction seven correlations (five partial correlations) were significant for intrinsic job motivation. The direction of the correlations was similar to that for positive events.

Discussion

The aim of this study was essentially two-fold: Firstly, to establish the reliability of the OASQ and secondly to examine its construct validity, through use of demographic and attitudinal correlates. Given the construct underlying the OASQ - namely the attributional style is related to occupational success and satisfaction, partial construct validity was assumed to be established by demonstrating significant correlations between OASQ scores, occupational status, salary, satisfaction and motivation. Both objectives were achieved. The OASQ was found to have acceptable alpha’s many much higher than the original ASQ, but still not as high as hoped. Indeed Cutrona, Russell and Jones (1 984) examined the reliability and the validity of the attributional style concept by examining subjects’ responses on the ASQ and analyzing the factor structure of the measure. Only weak evidence of cross-situational consistency was found, particularly for the internality dimension, with an average of 8.5 per cent of the variance in these items appearing to reflect the influence of an attributional style. Metalsky et al. (1982) hypothe- sized that a cross-situational consistent attributional style may characterize only a subset of the general population. With this suggestion in mind, these investigators selected individuals who tended to be very consistent across situations in their causal attributions on the ASQ. Factor analyses conducted on the responses of this sub-sample indicated that substantial situational specificity in attributions still existed for these consistent subjects. Tennen and Herzberger (1982) also report only modest internal consistency for ASQ scales, with lower reliability for

36 A. FURNHAM, V. SADKA A N D C. R. BREWIN

Table 5. First-order and partial correlations (in parentheses) between attributional style, job satisfaction and job motivation, controlling for age, sex, education, occupational status and salary

Job satisfaction Job motivation

Positive events 1 . Internality 2. Stability 3. Globality 4. Externality 5 . Chance 6. Personal control 7. Control 8. Foreseeability

9. Importance

Negative events 1. Internality 2. Stability 3. Globality 4. Externality 5. Chance 6. Personal control 7. Control 8. Foreseeability 9. Importance

Combined events 1. Internability 2. Stability 3. Globality 4. Externality 5. Chance 6. Personal control 7. Control 8. Foreseeability 9. Iniportance

0.24* (0.22t) -0.20t (-0.20t) -0.211. (-0.20t) -0.28* (-0.19t) -0.28* (-0.22t) -0.29* (0.25*) -0.30$ (-0.26*)

-0.08 (-0.07) 0.30$ (0.25*)

-0.20t (-0.221.) 0.00 (0.12)

0.01 (0.11)

0.12 (0.20t) 0.20t (0.10)

0.27* (0.31*) 0.15 (0.25*)

-0.12 (-0.13)

0.04 (0.05)

-0.01 (-0.01) -0.07 (-0.03)

-0.06 (0.04) -0.14 (-0.07)

0.13 (0.07) -0.10 (-0.01)

0.37$ (0.28*)

0.06 (0.08)

-0.02 (-0.03)

0.29$ (0.21*) -0.44$ (-0.43$) -0.31$ (-0.29*) -0.14 (-0.08) -0.25* (-0.207)

-0.16 (-0.187)

-0.40$ (-0.37$)

0.26* (0.20t)

0.30$ (0.17)

0.04 (0.02) -0.19t ( -0.13)

0.00 (0.01)

-0.21t (-0.20t) 0.01 (0.04)

0.03 (-0.02) 0.08 (0.14) 0.18t (0.04$)

-0.31$ (-0.33$)

0.21t (0.19t) -0.37$ (-0.33$) -0.27* (-0.23t) -0.27* (-0.33$) -0.24* (-0.15)

-0.07 (0.04)

-0.33$ (-0.32$)

0.22t (0.14)

0.35$ (0.20t)

* p < 0.01. t p < 0.05. f p < 0.001

locus scores. Cronbach’s alpha was 0.56 for stability ratings, 0.66 for globality ratings, but 0.21 for locus ratings.

Several explanations for this reliability problem have emerged. Peterson and Seligman ( 1 984) suggest that these modest levels of internal consistency found on the ASQ scales are not uncom- mon in scales that have few items. in the Cutrona et a1 (1984) study only the six negative events from the ASQ were employed in the analyses. Peterson and Seligman (1984) report that a revised version of the ASQ with 18 negative events produced coefficient alphas ranging from 0.66 to 0.88, thus yielding satisfactory estimates of internal consistency. Furthermore, Cutrona et al. (1984) suggest that the ASQ’s low internal consistency might also reflect some problems in test construction. Suffice to say the OASQ with a mean alpha of 0.676 seems equal to if not better than the original instrument upon which it was based in terms of reliability. However the improved test-retest reliability in the 0.80’s suggest that the scale has sufficient merit for further research and possibly even applications.

Although modest and restricted to self-report dependent measures, this study attempted to


provide some evidence of the construct validity of the scale. Overall the results were promising. One limitation of the study may have been the overlap between questionnaires and the issue of common method variance as a source of artefactual covariation. For instance, if the total questionnaire (OASQ plus other questionnaires) were factor-analysed, a strong first factor emerging would indicate possible common method variance.

Attributions for positive events particularly (and to a lesser extent with positive and negative combined) were significantly and consistently correlated with social class, salary, job satisfaction and intrinsic motivation. These attributions were what Seligman and Schulman (1986) called the optimistic versus pessimistic explanatory style for bad events. Optimists styles tended to attribute success (positive situations) to internal factors and failure externally. They found that an optimistic attributional style for both positive and negative events predicted survival and productivity in the jobs of sales agents just as the same style predicted salary, satisfaction and motivation in this study.

Contrary to the predictions of learned helplessness theory attributions for positive events were uniquely linked to the job attitudes and salary. Similar findings have been reported by Brewin and Shapiro (1984), who found that responsibility for positive outcomes, but not negative outcomes was linked to academic achievement. In contrast it is attributions for negative outcomes rather than positive outcomes that are most strongly associated with depression (Sweeney, Anderson and Bailey, 1986). Further research is necessary to explain these discrepancies. How- ever, to find an individual difference variable with such widespread predictive power (even correlational) is relatively rare in psychology (Furnham, 1990).

Of course, correlational results do not show direction of causality or rule out the probably likelihood of bi-directionality. Just as an optimistic attributional style may led to success and satisfaction, so success may enhance, maintain or change attributional style. Attribution style may indeed determine the choice of the job so may influence occupational behavior before the person is even encumbent in the job. the literature in this field suggests a mutual, reciprocal causative model is probably operating.

It is precisely because reciprocal causality is operating that researchers like Frantz (1980) and Andrisani and Nestel (1 976) have employed longitudinal studies to examine the effect of attribution on work experience. Spector (1982) has suggested that perceived control (internality) is related particularly to motivation and satisfaction and turnover if given unhappy work conditions. It seems perceptions and expectations associated with certain attributional styles (optimistic versus pessimistic) lead to various behaviors at work that lead to success which in turn serves to perpetuate the attributions. Changes at work and recurrent set-backs or failures however probably alter attributional styles rendering them fairly unstable over long periods of time.

One may predict that with the process of selection (self-selection and organizational selection) and socialization within an organization certain corporate attributional styles develop which may be observed in organizational climate and culture. Indeed the formal structure and beha- vioral norms in an organization must moderate the attributional style-work behavior relationship. Hence some styles fit with some organizations better than with others. Thus one may predict that optimistic attributional styles are associated with young, small, individualistic and competitive organizations, while pessimistic styles are associated with, bigger, bureaucratic organizations.

Clearly these findings have implications for both selection and training. If, as has been shown, attributional style is a correlate of satisfaction and motivation, it can be selected for in job applicants. Attribution training techniques have been successfully used to enhance academic attainment (Forsterling, 1985), and could be adapted to meet the needs of employers.

38 A. FURNHAM. V . SADKA A N D C. R . BREWIN

References Abramson, L., Seligman, M. and Teasdale, J . (1978). ‘Learned helplessness in humans: Critique and

Andrisani, P. and Nestel, G. (1976). ‘Internal-external control as contributor to and outcome of work

Bradley, C., Brewin, C. R., Gamsu, D. and Moses, J. (1984). ‘Development of scales to measure perceived

Brayfield, A. and Rothe, H. (1951). ‘An index of job satisfaction’, Journal of Applied Psychology, 35,

Brewin, C. R. (1985). ‘Depression and causal attributions: What is their relation?’ Psychological Bulletin,

Brewin, C . R. (1988). Cognitive Foundations of Clinical Psychology, Lawrence Erlbaum, London. Brewin, C. R. and Shapiro, D. (1984). ‘Beyond locus of control: Attribution of responsibility for positive

Coyne, J. and Gotlib, I. (1983). ‘The role of cognition in depression: A critical appraisal’, Psvchological

Cook, J . , Hepworth, S., Wall, T. and Warr, P. (1981). The Esperience of Work, Academic Press, London. Cook, J. and Wall, T. (1980). ‘New work attitude measures of trust, organisational commitment and

Cutrona, C., Russell, D. and Jones, R. (1984). ‘Cross-situational consistency in causal attributions: Does

Feather, N. (1983). ‘Causal attributions for good and bad outcomes in achievement and affiliation situa-

Forsterling, F. (1985). ‘Attributional retraining: A review’, Psychological Bulletin, 98,495-512. Frantz, R. (1980). ‘The effects of early labour market experience upon internal-external locus of control

Furnham, A. (1986). ‘Economic locus of control’, Human Relations, 39,2943. Furnham, A. (1990). The Protestant work Ethic, Routledge, London. Furnham, A. and Procter, E. (1989). ‘Belief in a just world: Review and critique of the individual difference

literature’, British Journal ofsocial Psychology, 28,365-389. Hammar, T. and Vardi, Y . (1981). ‘Locus of control and career self-management among non-supervising

employees in industrial settings’, Journal of Vocational Behaviour, 18, 13-29. Hartley, M. (1976). ‘The relationship of locus of control and need achievement to job satisfaction’, Disser-

tation Abstracts International, 36,62 1-632. Lester, D. and Genz, J. (1978). ‘Internal-external locus of control, experience as a police officer, and

job satisfaction in municipal police officers’, Journal of Police Science and Administration, 6,479481. Metalsky, G. Abramson, L., Seligman, M., Semmel, A. and Peterson, C. (1982). ‘Attributional styles

and life events in the classroom: Vulnerability and invulnerability to depressive mood reactions, Journal of Personality and Soc,ial Psychology, 43,704-71 8.

O’Brien, G. (1984). ‘Locus of control, work and retirement’. In: Lefcourt, H. (Ed). Research with the locus of Control Construct, Vol4, Academic Press, New York. p. 7-72.

Peterson, C., Semmel, .4., Von Baeyer, C., Abramson, L., Metalsky, G. and Seligman, M. (1982). ‘The Attributional Style Questionnaire’, Cognitive Therapy and Research, 6,281-300.

Roark, A. (1978). ‘The relationships of perception of change in finding jobs to locus of control and to job search variables on the part of human resource ageing personnel’, Dissertation Abstracts Znternatio- nal, 38,2070.

Russell, D. (1982). ‘The causal dimension scale: A measure of how individuals perceive causes’, Journul of Personality and Social Psychology, 42, 1 137-1 145.

Seligman, M., Abramson, L., Semmel, A. and Von Baeyer, C. (1979). ‘Depressive attributional style’, Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 88,242-247.

Seligman, M. and Schulman, P. (1986). ‘Explanatory style as a predictor of productivity and quitting among life insurance sales agents’, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50,832-830.

Spector, P. (1982). ‘Behaviour in organisations as a function of employees’ locus of control’, Psychological Bulletin, 91,482497.

Singh, M. (1978). ‘The relationship of job satisfaction with locus of control, organizational setting and education’, Dissertation Abstracts International, 38,684.

reformulation’. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 87, 3248.

experience’, Journal ofApplied Psychology, 61, 1561 63.

control of diabetes mellitus and diabetes related health beliefs’, Diabetic Medicine, 1,213-218.

207-3 1 1.

98,297-309.

and negative outcomes’, British Journal of Psychology, 75,43-50.

Bulletin, 94,472-505.

personal need non-fulfilment’, Journal of Occupational Psychology, 53,39-52.

attributional style exist?’ Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 47, 1043-1 058.

tions’, Australian Journal of Psychology, 35, 37-48.

among male workers’, Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 9.202-210.


Sweeney, P. Anderson, K. and Bailey, S . (1986). ‘Attributional style in depression: A meta-analytic review’,

Warr, P., Cook, J. and Wall, T. (1979). ‘Scales for the measurement of some work attitudes and aspects

Weiner, B. (1986). An Attributional Theory of Motivation and Emotion, Springer-Verlag, New York.

Journal of Personality and Social Psychologji, 50, 7 7 4 7 9 1.

of psychological well-being’, Journal of Occupational Psychology, 52, 129-148.

the development of an occupational attributional style questionnaire

Documents