Abstract
Historically, the predominant focus of attributions research in sport has been on the individual athlete. In overview, results show athletes are self-serving, assuming high responsibility for success and substantially lower responsibility for failure. More recently, the appearance of the Greenlees et al. (2005) Causal Dimension Scale for Teams (CDS-T) has led to increased interest in team-oriented attributions. Individual studies (e.g., Dithurbide, Sullivan, & Chow, 2009; Greenlees et al. 2007) indicate the presence of a weak team enhancing bias--that the self-serving bias is not characteristic of teams. The purpose of the present study was to determine empirically (via meta-analysis) whether team-oriented attributions are team enhancing. A secondary issue was to compare results from two operational measures—those from Weiner's conceptual model versus those from Greenlees CDS-T. Standard literature searches produced 23 studies containing 83 effect sizes. The results showed a strong team enhancing bias when measures based on Weiner's conceptualization were used (Hedges' g = .95, .62, .11, .28 for ability, effort, task difficulty and luck respectively). While a similar team enhancing pattern was present from attributions secured with the CDS-T, the effects were considerably weaker (Hedges g = .32, .14, .90, .22, for locus of causality, external control, stability, and team control respectively).
