Research on <u>"the fundamental attribution error" </u>suggests it is <u>"common"</u> for people to assume that dispositions are the underlying causes of most behaviors.
The fundamental attribution error is our tendency to clarify somebody's conduct in light of inward factors, for example, identity or air, and to think little of the impact that outside variables, for example, situational impacts, have on someone else's conduct. We may, for instance, clarify the way that somebody is jobless in view of his character, and point the finger at him for his predicament, when in certainty he was as of late laid off because of a lazy economy. Obviously, there are times when we're right about our suspicions, however the key attribution blunder is our inclination to clarify the conduct of others in light of character or air. This is especially obvious when the conduct is negative.
Answer:
Are you asking us to compare the two of them?
Explanation:
Thank you for posting your question here at brainly. <span>The Supreme Court ruled against the plaintiff, holding that the government was allowed to reimburse the parents of parochial school children for the costs incurred by sending them to school on public busses.</span>
