Illustrations of Attribution Theory: Personal View

The attribution theory was introduced by Fritz. It can be defined as seeks to explain how and why people make these causal behavioral decisions or choices. This can be shown in the stories of Job, Joseph, Jonah, and whale, and Mathews.

For my first illustration, I chose the story Job 1:7-12 ( BibleGateway) because Satan came before the Lord. God said to Satan, “whence comest thou? Satan said unto the Lord, “I’m going to and fro in the earth, and from walking up and down it.” Satan was questioning Jobs's love and obedience to God. He said that the only reason that Job was faithful was that God had a protective hedge around him. Because God trusted in Jobs's love for him, God allowed Satan to attack Jobs's spirit, his finances, and his natural body, but not his spiritual soul. Job lost everything, however, through all of the trials, he never sinned or charged God foolishly.

Also in Job 1:13-2, again Satan came before the Lord to tempt Job against God and was allowed more trials and tribulations to come upon him. He was stricken with diseases, his children died, wide and friends criticized him. He was under great attack with sores of his body.

Then in 38-42, Job became discouraged and angry at God because of all of the illnesses, loss of his family, and wealth. God’s response to Job was surprising. God asked Job, “where were you when I hung the stars when the earth was formed when the sky was lighted?” Job repented to God and his faith continued to be restored in God. Moses was angry at the people because they begin to worship idols while he was on Mount cyanide receiving the books of the Bible from God. Joseph was angry at his brothers because they sold him into slavery. He ends up in Egypt and later was able to help people. Judith was angry at Jesus and later betrayed him.

My thoughts on the story of Job, it was a good example of attribution theory because in the beginning Job was very blessed and pridefully believed it was due to his righteousness, but God quickly changed that idea. When job cursed his birth (side note in actuality cursing his birth by default cursed his creator). And when his wife left he called her foolish but she felt job did something to take the anointing off him.

In my second illustration, the story of Joseph, specifically Genesis chapter 37 & 38, 39, 45:1-6 (BibleGateway), he was angry with his brothers because they sold him into Egyptian slavery because of their jealousy of his God-given gift. Originally, the Israelites came to Egypt because of a drought in the land. Joseph was the son of Jacob and Rachel. He was loved dearly by his father which generated animosity and jealousy among his ten other brothers. God had given him a spiritual gift of dreams. His father sent him to meet with his brothers that were working in a nearby town. They were so jealous of him, they sold him into slavery to Egyptian merchants at the age of approximately twenty years old. He had a long hard life until his gift was recognized by others, including the pharaoh.

Joseph secured a high position in Pharaoh’s court through the favor of God. There was a drought in the land. With the wisdom and guidance of the Lord, he was able to save his people, the children of Israel. In addition, his new life, including a wife and child helped to soften his heart. When he once again saw his brothers, he had a heart of forgiveness. He was successful in saving a nation.

My thoughts on the story of Joseph, was a good example of attribution theory because he used it to surpass tough situations such as his brother sold him and then being falsely accused. He also had the ability to interpret dreams and knew the fate of the prisoners which he definitely used that to his advantage.

My fourth illustration, Matthew 14:28:31, “Lord, if it’s you,” Peter replied, “tell me to come to you on the water.” “Come,” he said. Then Peter got down out of the boat, walked on the water, and came toward Jesus. But when he saw the wind, he was afraid and, beginning to sink, cried out, “Lord, save me!” Immediately Jesus reached out his hand and caught him. “You of little faith,” he said, “why did you doubt?”(BibleGateway). Because Peter started to sink after he got out of the boat. He was able to walk on water as long as he kept his focus on Jesus. Once he lost focus, he started to sink. Attribution theory would say he began to sink, because of his internal doubt and reality that people can't walk on water.

According to the article, Religiousness: Its Relation to Loneliness, Neuroticism, and Subjective Well-Being by: Schwab, Reinhold, Petersen, and Kay Uwe, the study uses 115 ladies and 91 men matured somewhere in the range of 15 and 87 finished a poll concerning religious convictions, religious conduct, forlornness, neuroticism, and abstract prosperity. The different elements of religiousness were identified with depression in various manners. Though the idea of 'A Wrathful God' was connected decidedly to depression, a conviction just in the presence of God was free of it. 'A Helpful God,' then again, demonstrated a negative connection with dejection ( Schwab et al). The connection among religiousness and depression, be that as it may, was fairly moderate in contrast with the connection among neuroticism and forlornness and abstract prosperity. In like manner, the relationships between's religiousness measures and neuroticism were somewhat low. The significance of separating between different religious insights and different components of forlornness is underscored, and a conceivable method for helping the desolate is talked about. It showed a correlation between social psychology and religion and certain principles hit stronger than others, but regardless have some level of effect on religious thoughts and behaviors.

According to the article, Explaining Life-Altering Occurrences: A Test of the 'God-of-the Gaps' Hypothesis, by Lupfer, Michael B., Tolliver, Donna, and Jackson, Mark, the study uses this analysis expands the developing writing planned for recognizing the conditions that affect individuals to make religious attributions. A sum of 177 subjects has introduced a progression of 16 vignettes after every one of which they gave an attributional investigation. The occasion portrayed in every vignette was either (an) an activity or event having (b) a positive or negative result that was (c) life-changing or non-life changing. Subjects are chosen their attributions from a menu that included religious causal operators (God, Satan), a few naturalistic causes (e.g., the hero's qualities, different on-screen characters), and nonreligious-supernaturalistic causes (destiny, karma) (Lupfer et al). . As anticipated, attributions to God were most usually made when the occasion was a life-changing event having positive results. Attributions to Satan, seldom made, were provoked by life-changing occasions having negative outcomes. Concerning whether subjects displayed a 'Divine force of the holes' example of causal thinking, the proof was blended yet would in general help the end that they didn't. The study was interested because I did not really factor in that people's different religious values like religious and nonreligious-supernaturalistic played a role in actions and choices of behavior.

Bile and social psychology have more in common than I would have ever thought. The attribution theory fits nicely with the stories I picked of Jobs, Joseph, Jonah, and the whale, and Mathews.