Self-serving biases in the attribution of causality: Fact or fiction?
Miller and Ross review the evidence on self-serving biases in causal attribution. They report little support for the idea in its broadest form: some evidence for self-enhancing attributions after success, little for self-protective attributions after failure. They propose that the credit-taking after success may rest on non-motivational tendencies: expecting one's behaviour to produce success, seeing a closer link between behaviour and outcome when success is increasing than when failure is constant, and misreading the meaning of contingency.
Miller and Ross review the evidence on self-serving biases in causal attribution. They report little support for the idea in its broadest form: some evidence for self-enhancing attributions after success, little for self-protective attributions after failure. They propose that the credit-taking after success may rest on non-motivational tendencies: expecting one's behaviour to produce success, seeing a closer link between behaviour and outcome when success is increasing than when failure is constant, and misreading the meaning of contingency.
Written from the abstract, publisher-linked record (Stanford GSB faculty publications page) and DOI listing, 2026-11-03.
What our sources record
Recorded when this source was checked, figures included, with page references and quotation marks removed.
Miller, D. T., & Ross, M. (1975). Self-serving biases in the attribution of causality: Fact or fiction? Psychological Bulletin, 82(2), 213-225. doi:10.1037/h0076486 https://doi.org/10.1037/h0076486