Although I'm risking sounding incredibly intellectually challenged, I was just wondering whether anyone can make sense of this sentence, in a journal I'm reading,

"Observers are often not informed about how the actor has behaved in similar situations. Observers therefore base their causal judgements entirely on consensus information".

What does "consensus information" mean in this context? I thought I was on a roll today after doing no work for 3 weeks, but I've been staring at this sentence and can't make sense of it! It's related to pscyh/attribution if that makes any difference.

Thanks all!

gawd I hate sentences like that. If you want to PM me the article though I could have a look. I've done a lot of attribution stuff for my PhD.

hi Button

Does it mean that the observers base their decisions and judegements based on what evidence already exists about the actors? In essence, are they basing judgements on other observers interpretation of the actor's behaviour? Since the observer does not know how the actors react to same situations the observer is forced to rely on similar work that was conducted on the actors in that particular situation?

AJ

or does it mean that the observers base their judgements on generally held perceptions (i.e. amongst others) about that person's behaviour?

Dear Sneaks and Button

thats what i meant...consensus is like generally whats agreed between everyone so im thinking that it could be based on general views about the actors behaviour. but, there could be a disadvantage of this that the outcomes of how actor would behave is already predicted if you just consider general perceptions. So, it should be confirmed by performing individual assessments?

ah yes, that's what I was trying to get it - so it must be that! makes sense, especially if you're looking at bias in attributions.

Hi Button.

I would read and think intersubjective norms..  symbolic interactionism ... social constructionism..

From that viewpoint i would interpret 'consensus information' as information presented during the current context, nonconciously provided by the actor and interpreted by the observer.

i'm trying to think of an example... and here's what comes to mind..

i have a perception of how a footballer behaves, i act in this way,  as an observer you have your perception of how a footballer behaves too. We come to a consensus, via meeting somewhere between my perception and your perception of how a footballer behaves and agree in that context that i am acting as footballer.

That's the consensus - meeting somewhere in between our nonconcious perception.

Information - is the actors behaviour, their agency which links the two.

Does this make any sense at all ? 

If not.. i'll say - i have no idea what that means ;-)

Chuff

You clever people! Thanks a lot to you all, I can now write about it and understand it, rather than just pretending I understand it!