Root Principle

Having and using a right standard of why we do what we do is important to sound judgment and understanding who we are and why we do what we do. Without a right standard we will be susceptible to the fundamental attribution error.

 Measuring ourselves, our values, and our behaviors using our situation, and excluding our personality traits is equally as dangerous as others judging us by using our personality traits to the exclusion of situational factors in our lives.

The root of just about all of the principles in social psychology usually comes in the form of cognitive bias called the fundamental attribution error. It reveals how people tend to consider their own behavior in a different, biased, way from the way they perceive the behavior of others.

Real Life

Within the world of congregational Christianity, or, one might say, the church world this error has proved to be very invasive. As a minister, there never seems to be a dull moment. Each week brings many and varied challenges that seemingly pop up to derail us from our already overloaded schedule. 

One of the major points of conflict between staff members (ministers) and laity (church members) is understanding the differences between who we are, what we do, and what we deal with everyday. Ask a church member to comment on how effective they believe a particular minister is in their role, and many of the comments will revolve around likes and dislikes pertaining to the minister’s personality. 

In contrast, ask a minister about his effectiveness and you will likely hear about the daily grind, and all of the areas of responsibilities and unforeseen circumstances that make up their ministry. As much as the minister’s tend to lean into the situation, the membership leans much hard into the personality.

It is normal to want to understand why people behave the way they do. It is just natural curiosity for most of us. Using cognitive biases is a standard way for the brain to process human behavior. The problem we need to recognize is that cognitive biases can be wrong. 

Observing someone’s personality can allow us to make quick decisions about that person, but we need to be careful and remain cognizant of our biases so we can consider the alternate explanations for someone’s behavior.

To remedy the fundamental attribution error I try to put myself in the shoes of the other person. I think about what I might do in the same situation. 

By doing these things, I can come up with some situational factors that may lend themselves to the behavior exhibited. I also look for hidden factors to help me better read the other person’s behavior. 

The inverse is also just as important. When I look at my own behavior, I need to avoid the actor-observer effect, and be sure to include my own personality when I am assigning credit for my own actions. 

TJ