How to CAVE

CAVE CODING GUIDELINES

As with the Attributional Style Questionnaire, ratings of the explanations are assigned to each of three dimensions--internal versus external, stable versus unstable, and global versus specific--using a 7 point scale.

Ratings range from 1 to 7 for each dimension, with

7 representing the most internal, stable and global explanations; and

1 for the most external, unstable, and specific explanations

Rater's attempt to rate the subject's perception of the cause.

Examine the gramatical nuances and take each phrase's rich context into account.

The nuances of an explanation may help in rating such ambiguous and difficult causes as age, sickness, injury and social classification.

THE INTERNAL-EXTERNAL DIMENSION

The 7 point scale for this dimension is divided into 3 regions

1, if the individual attributes cause to someone or something external to the self;

7, if the individual attributes cause to any behavioral, physical, or mental characteristic about the self;

2 to 6, if the individual attributes the cause of an event to some combination of the self and other.

This scale is not directly a measure of blame, credit, responsibility--taking or control, rather it is defined by self-caused versus other-caused--internal versus external

Examples of a 1 rating include explaining an event by:

another person's actions

the difficulty or ease of a task

time or the environment (such as a natural disaster, circumstances or the weather)

Examples of a 7 rating include references to the individual's own:

personality or physical traits

behavior, decisions, ability or inability

motivation, knowledge

disability, illness, injury, age

social or political classification (such as widow, conservative, etc.)

Ratings in the 2 through 6 range apply to explanations in which the cause shares both internal and external elements and is an interaction between self and another person or between self and environment.

Here are some examples:

EXTERNAL	INTERNAL
E: I did well on the test.	E: I did well on the test.
A: because it was easy. Rating = 1.	A: because I studied hard. Rating = 7.
E: I didn't get the job.	E: I didn't get the job.
A: because they discriminate. Rating = 1.	A: because I'm a woman. Rating = 7.

IN BETWEEN INTERNAL AND EXTERNAL

E: I'm having problems with a friend.

A: because she can't accept my perfectionism. Rating = 2 or 3.

E: We're getting a divorce.

A: we're just not compatible. Rating = 4.

E: I need surgery on my knee.

A: It's getting worse from jogging. Rating = 4.

E: I'm aphasic.

A: when I get overheated. Rating = 4.

THE STABLE-UNSTABLE DIMENSION

This dimension refers to the persistence in time of a cause, whether the cause of the event is chronic (stable) versus temporary (unstable).

It is important to keep in mind that we are assessing the stability of the CAUSE, not the stability of the EVENT.

Since many events are unique and may never happen again, rating the stability of the event will add nothing to our understanding of an individual's style of explaining events. So, we rate the stability of the cause at a point in time.

Even though the stable and global dimensions overlap in reality, it is important to rate each of these two dimensions independently of each other.

There are four interacting criteria that help to determine the rating of stability:

1. The verb tense of the cause. If the cause of the event is in the past tense, then the rating would tend to be less stable than if the cause is in the present or progressive tense.

2. The probability of future re--occurrence of the cause. A cause that is unlikely to occour again would be less stable than a cause that is like to occur again.

3. An intermittent vs. continuous cause. A cause that is intermittent, such as the weather, would be less stable than a continuous cause such as a physical trait.

4. A characterological vs. behavioral cause. Explaining an event by a character trait (e.g., I am smart, lazy decisive) is more stable than attributing an event to a behavior (e.g., I did a smart thing. I made a bad decision.)

Here are some examples:

E: I'm afraid to go out when it's dark. A: Since I was mugged. Rating = 4. (This cause occurred in the past, has a small probability of a future occurrence but may exert an ongoing influence on behavior.) E: I can't restrain my appetite. A: when I see someone else eating. Rating = 4. (This cause occurred in the present tense, is likely to occur again and intermittent.) E: It's difficult for me to express anger. A: That's just the way I was raised. Rating = 5. (This cause occurred in the past but definitely exerts an ongoing influence on behavior.) E: I didn't get the job. A: Because I'm a woman (or blind or intelligent, etc). Rating = 7. (This cause is unalterable and continuous.)

THE GLOBAL-SPECIFIC DIMENSION

This dimension measures the extent to which a cause affects an individual's whole life (global) or just a few areas (specific).

This dimension is often the most difficult to rate because there is rarely enough information in the extraction to indicate how widespread the effects of the cause are and what the important domains of an individual's life is.

For example, poor math abilities would have a greater effect on an accountant than a painter, quality of friendships would tend to be more important to a socially oriented person than a workaholic, and a sprained anke would have greater impact for a professional skater than a computer programmer.

In the absence of such intimate knowledge, it is useful to think of how a cause impacts the broad scope of an "average" individual's life in terms of two major categories‹achievement and affiliation‹each comprised of numerous subcategories.

Clearly, this is an artificial distinction and is neither exclusive not exhaustive, but it is heuristic and helps keep the rater from projecting one's own bias into the globality rating.

Achievement, for instance, would include occupational or academic success, accumulation of knowledge or skills, sense of individuality or independence, economic or social status.

Affiliation includes intimate relationships, sense of belongingness, sex, play, marital or family health.

These are just a few examples. Causes could affect just one situation, part of one category, all of one category, or all of both categories.

It is often helpful to look to the event to judge the globality of the cause, since the event is one effect in the universe of possible effects.

DO NOT, however, rate only the effects mentioned in the event, since the cause may affect more than what is stated in the event.

Primarily, rate the globality of the cause and only secondarily look at the event as one of the effects of the cause.

Here are some examples:

E: I got a speeding ticket. A: I guess the cop had to fill his quota for the day. Rating = 1. (This cause affects one situation.) E: My relationships are handicapped. A: by my fear of spontaneity. Rating = 2 or 3. (This cause affects part of the affiliative category and possibly part of the achievement category.) E: My body image has gotten worse. A: since my breast was removed. Rating = 4 or 5. (This cause affects parts of both categories.) E: I've had to cut back on my level of activity. A: since my heart attack. Rating = 4 or 5. (This cause affects parts of both categories.) E: I've lost all zest for life. A: since my husband died. Rating = 6 or 7. (Most of both categories are affected by this cause.)