Aim
To assess the attributional style of an individual in terms of
internal–external, stable–unstable, and global–specific
explanations for positive and negative events using the
Attributional Style Questionnaire (ASQ).
Introduction
In the introduction, you can cover the following points so
students have the theoretical foundation before the practical:
1. Concept of Attribution
o Definition of attribution (Heider’s theory – people act
as naïve scientists seeking to explain behavior).
o Why understanding causality is important in everyday
life.
2. Theoretical Background
o Heider’s Attribution Theory – internal vs. external
causes.
o Jones & Davis Correspondent Inference Theory – how
people infer personality traits from behavior.
o Kelley’s Covariation Model – consensus, consistency,
distinctiveness.
3. Dimensions of Attribution
o Internal–External: Whether the cause is within the
person or in the environment.
o Stable–Unstable: Whether the cause is likely to change
over time or remain the same.
o Global–Specific: Whether the cause affects many areas
of life or just one situation.
4. Attributional Style
o Definition: A person’s habitual way of explaining
events.
o Optimistic vs. Pessimistic styles (relationship with
mental health, especially depression).
5. Development of ASQ
o Created by Abramson, Metalsky, and Alloy (1978).
o Based on the reformulated learned helplessness
theory.
6. Applications
o In clinical psychology (depression risk assessment).
o In educational psychology (student motivation).
o In health psychology (coping with illness).
Objectives
By the end of this practical, students will be able to:
1. Understand the concept of attribution and its role in human
behavior.
2. Identify and differentiate the three dimensions of attribution
(internality, stability, globality).
3. Administer and score the Attributional Style Questionnaire
(ASQ).
4. Interpret results to determine an individual’s attributional
style.
5. Relate attributional style to possible psychological outcomes
(e.g., optimism, pessimism, depression risk).
Method
Participants
One participant (classmate) for demonstration purposes.
Age: Above 16 years.
Tool Used
Attributional Style Questionnaire (ASQ) – Abramson,
Metalsky, & Alloy (1978).
Attributional Style Questionnaire (ASQ) – Detailed Guide
🔹 Developed by:
Peterson, Semmel, von Baeyer, Abramson, Metalsky, and Seligman (1982)
✅ 1. Purpose
The ASQ is designed to assess an individual's attributional
(explanatory) style, which refers to how people explain the causes of
events, particularly positive and negative events in their lives.
✅ 2. Structure of the ASQ
12 hypothetical events:
o 6 positive events
o 6 negative events
For each event, the respondent is asked to:
1. Write down the most likely cause.
2. Rate the cause on three dimensions:
Internality (Internal vs External)
Stability (Stable vs Unstable)
Globality (Global vs Specific)
✅ 3. Sample Items
Event
Example Scenario
Type
“You get a good grade on a
Positive
test.”
Negative “You fail to keep a friend.”
✅ 4. Rating Dimensions (Each rated on a 7-point Likert scale)
Dimensi Scal
Description
on e
Internali 1 = Completely external cause; 7 = Completely internal
1–7
ty cause
1 = Temporary/unstable cause; 7 = Stable/permanent
Stability 1–7
cause
1 = Cause affects only this situation; 7 = Cause affects
Globality 1–7
many situations
✅ 5. Scoring the ASQ
🟩 Step 1: Obtain raw scores
Each item has 3 ratings → 12 items × 3 ratings = 36 scores
Separate items into:
o Positive items (Items 1–6)
o Negative items (Items 7–12)
🟩 Step 2: Compute subscale scores
👉 Positive Attributional Style Scores
Add and average the internality, stability, and globality ratings for
positive events.
o E.g., Positive Internality Score = Sum of internality ratings
for items 1–6 ÷ 6
o Similarly compute Positive Stability and Positive Globality
scores.
👉 Negative Attributional Style Scores
Add and average the ratings for negative events (Items 7–12).
👉 Composite Score for Negative Events
Calculate a composite score for negative events by averaging the
3 dimensions:
o Composite = (Negative Internality + Stability + Globality) ÷ 3
🟩 Step 3: Overall Attributional Style Index (ASI)
Often calculated only for negative events.
Formula:
ASI=Internality + Stability + Globality (for negative events)3\text{ASI} = \
frac{\text{Internality + Stability + Globality (for negative events)}}
{3}ASI=3Internality + Stability + Globality (for negative events)
Lower ASI = more external, unstable, and specific attributions
(less pessimistic)
Higher ASI = more internal, stable, and global attributions
(more pessimistic)
✅ 6. Example Scoring
Suppose a participant responds to a negative event like:
“You fail a test” and rates the cause as:
Internality = 6
Stability = 5
Globality = 6
This response reflects a pessimistic explanatory style, attributing the
failure to:
Internal (their own fault)
Stable (it will happen again)
Global (it affects many areas)
Do this for all 6 negative events, compute the mean scores for each
dimension and the overall composite.
✅ 7. Norms
📊 Normative Data (Peterson et al., 1982 - college samples)
Attribution Style Mean ± SD (Positive Mean ± SD (Negative
Dimension Events) Events)
Internality 5.42 ± 1.06 4.56 ± 1.34
Stability 4.70 ± 1.26 4.24 ± 1.19
Attribution Style Mean ± SD (Positive Mean ± SD (Negative
Dimension Events) Events)
Globality 4.64 ± 1.21 4.23 ± 1.19
Composite ASI
— 4.34 ± 0.92
(Negative)
💡 Interpretation Tip:
ASI > 5.0 → Highly pessimistic explanatory style
ASI < 3.5 → Optimistic explanatory style
These norms may vary depending on population (e.g., clinical vs non-
clinical) and age.