Cross-cultural comparison of attributions for success and failure in examinations by New Zealand European and Singapore Chinese university students

Abstract

A field study was carried out to examine the attributions for success and failure in examinations made by 200 New Zealand European and 200 Singapore Chinese students. Data for this study were collected by the author personally, from universities in each country. A questionnaire employing bipolar rating scales, percentage ratings and free open-ended responses was used in the study. It was found that there were significant differences between the cultures in the way that success and failure were defined, and that European students indicate a higher need for achievement than the Chinese students. There was evidence to suggest that the attribution process is more likely to be elicited by negative outcomes but the study failed to find any support for the view that expectedness of an outcome is factor which influences the process of making attributions. The study also indicates that reference to both effort and ability as causes of success and failure in examinations is common to both cultures. The Chinese students were more likely to report the influence of luck over their outcomes than European students. European students on the other hand, were more likely to use task difficulty to account for failure. Significant differences were found between the way the two groups perceived causal explanations in relation to Weiner's bipolar dimensions of locus of causality, stability and controllability, though there was also evidence to suggest that there was a high degree of dimensional equivalence in these three dimensions in the two cultures. There was virtual equivalence in the placing of each of the ten causal factors on each dimension. Problems in carrying out cross-cultural work in attribution theory were discussed, and suggestions were made of methodological strategies that can be used to assist future cross-cultural attributional research.