The fundamental attribution error: A literary example

From “Judge Savage,” by Tim Parks:

That evening, Daniel called Hilary’s parents. These people always disliked me, he knew. He had never understood if it was a racial thing, or whether they would have disliked any partner of Hilary’s.

Very clever. Parks demonstrates Daniel’s blind spot–he can’t imagine that maybe Hilary’s parents hate him because of his unpleasant personality–but does it entirely from Daniel’s perspective. I wonder if this just came naturally to Parks, or whether he figured it out as a puzzle to solve–how to convey a blind spot from the perspective of the person looking and not noticing it–or whether Parks wasn’t thinking at all about this and it just happened.

Considering the character Daniel’s psychology, I’d consider the above as an example of the so-called fundamental attribution error, in that he’s attributing Hilary’s parents dislike of him to situational factors rather than to his own personality.

I’ll have more on “Judge Savage” later (on the topic of “fighting the last war”).

2 thoughts on “The fundamental attribution error: A literary example

  1. More standardly, the fundamental attribution error is the opposite of this–preferring dispositional to situational explanations. But the example does illustrate the one situation in which reversals are common: when we ourselves are the target of a negative judgment or action. In that case, we tend towards situational attributions.
    You're late because you're lazy, I'm late because of the traffic.

Comments are closed.