A student sees a classmate arrive late once and concludes the classmate is irresponsible, even though a bus delay caused the lateness. Which social-cognitive error is most evident?
- AOveremphasizing a dispositional explanation while underusing situational information.correct
- BChanging an attitude to reduce tension after acting against a belief.
- CImproving memory because the test environment matches the study environment.
- DLearning a fear response through repeated pairing.
Why A is correct
The observer makes a dispositional attribution despite situational evidence.
dispositional attribution explains the evidence in "A student sees a classmate arrive late once and concludes the classmate is irresponsible, even though a bus...". The credited option, "Overemphasizing a dispositional explanation while underusing situational information", is supported because The judgment focuses on personality and neglects the bus delay. "Changing an attitude to reduce tension after acting against a belief" is a real-looking alternative, but Cognitive dissonance is not described; "Improving memory because the test environment matches the study environment" also fails because Context-dependent memory is unrelated to judging another person's lateness. The aim is to connect the concrete evidence to the psychological mechanism, then reject choices that shift the process, time frame, or research logic away from the scenario pattern.
Common mistakes. "Changing an attitude to reduce tension after acting against a belief" is the first trap: Cognitive dissonance is not described. "Improving memory because the test environment matches the study environment" is different but still misses the task because context-dependent memory is unrelated to judging another person's lateness.