Attributions of Academic Success and Failure

Publisher Website
Google Scholar
Abstract
Causal attribution research has not systematically varied the levels or units analyzed. Therefore, generalizations are difficult to apply to diverse educational conditions and to members of an aggregated group like the Asian Americans. The present study varied level of analysis by contrasting the causal attributions between two outcomes (success and failure) and between two academic content areas (language arts/social studies and mathematics/science). Unit of analysis varied according to the Asian ethnicity of American students in six distinct groups: Chinese, Filipino, Japanese, Korean, Vietnamese, and other Southeast Asians. Subjects were 2,511 Asian Americans in grades 4 through 11 who took the Survey of Achievement Responsibility, an attribution scale. A 2 (Success or Failure Outcome) x 2 (Language Arts/Social Studies or Math/Science Content Area) x 6 (Ethnic Group) x 2 (Lunch Subsidy or No Subsidy) analysis of variance with repeated measures revealed that effort more than ability was the attributional choice in explaining academic performance. Content area induced varying attributions, such as the fact that language arts/social studies more than math/science engendered effortful work. The six Asian American groups had distinctive attributional profiles. Complex data patterns demonstrate the need for less generalized motivational descriptions of "Asian Americans" in the aggregate and more specific attention to the unique patterns of each ethnic group.

This publication has 14 references indexed in Scilit: