The Place of Naive Contents in a Theory of Attribution: Reflections on Calder's and Zuckerman's Critiques of the Endogenous-Exogenous Partition
Based on Calder's and Zuckerman's recent comments this paper re-examines internal and endogenous attributions in the broad context of lay inference. It is proposed that both internality and endogeneity refer to the contents of attribution rather than to the Process of attribution. In this sense internality and endogeneity are not part of the scientific theory of attribution that must remain invariant across contents. Furthermore, the following specific conclusions are reached: (1) Arguments to the contrary notwithstanding the internal-external partition does appear troubled by the problems of criterion and of inference, while the endogenous-exogenous partition seems relatively clear of these problems. (2) The endogenous (-exogenous) and the internal (-external) distinctions differ authentically from each other rather than being conceptually equivalent, or being merely stated on different levels of abstraction. (3) The contents of attribution must be specified from the layman's perspective, otherwise they may not account for lay inferences. Therefore, the suggestion that endogeneity is phenomenological and internality - scientific is judged unacceptable.