Correspondence bias in the attribution of political attitudes (a replication of Jones and Harris’s (1967) experiment on correspondence bias)

Abstract

The study investigated correspondence bias in the attribution of political attitudes by finding out if choice and behavior direction would influence participants’ estimates of a person’s true attitude on a controversial political issue. In a replication of Jones and Harris’s (1967) classic experiment on correspondence bias, a sample of 145 college students were randomly assigned in one of the four treatment conditions wherein they were instructed to read an essay that is: a) pro-Reproductive Health (RH) Law, written in choice condition; b) pro-RH Law, written in no choice condition; c) anti-RH Law, written in choice condition; or d) anti-RH Law, written in no choice condition. The participants were then asked to estimate the true attitude of the essay-writer. Results showed that the participants estimated the writer’s true attitude as being more in favor of the side of the issue in which the direction of the essay was written, regardless of whether it was written in the choice or no choice condition. Thus, correspondence bias was evident in the participants’ attribution of political attitudes.