What Seligman and his colleagues proposed was that when people are looking for causes for failure, they display a variety of predispositions to accept one type of cause or another, quite apart from what the actual cause of the failure might be. There are three key dimensions to these predispositions, based on whether we view causes as being global or specific, chronic or transient, personal or universal.
Seligman and his team suggested that individuals often attribute their failures to specific causes based on their inherent biases rather than the actual reasons for the setbacks. These biases manifest in three main dimensions, which are how people perceive the causes of failures—whether they see them as global or specific, chronic or transient, and personal or universal. This means that the way someone interprets the cause of their failure can significantly influence their emotional response and future actions.
This perspective highlights the complexity of human psychology in dealing with failure. Instead of objectively assessing the situation, people may filter their judgments through these predispositions, leading to varied interpretations of the same event. Understanding these biases can help individuals and professionals better navigate the challenges of failure and develop more effective coping strategies.
