The actor-observer bias describes which pattern of attribution?

• A. People explain others' behavior in terms of stable traits and their own actions in terms of the situation
• B. People attribute both others' and their own actions to stable traits
• C. People attribute successes to luck and failures to effort
• D. People explain all behavior as a product of environmental factors

Answer: (A)

The main idea here is how people explain why others do something versus why they themselves do it. The actor-observer bias shows an asymmetry: we tend to view others’ actions as driven by stable, internal traits, while we see our own actions as driven by the situation or external factors. For example, if someone else doesn’t finish a task on time, we might label them as lazy or lacking ability. But when we’re the ones who miss a deadline, we’re more likely to blame the circumstances—a heavy workload, unclear instructions, or distractions. That contrast captures the pattern described.

This matches the described pattern because it emphasizes the difference in attribution depending on whether we’re the actor or the observer. The other options describe different patterns: attributing both others’ and one’s own actions to stable traits ignores the situational influence on our own behavior; attributing successes to luck and failures to effort reflects a self-serving bias; attributing all behavior to environmental factors ignores personal tendencies and explanations for behavior.