Hostile Attribution Bias: Examples, Definition, Criticisms

hostile attribution bias examples and definition, explained below

Hostile attribution bias refers to a cognitive bias where individuals interpret behaviors from others through a negative lens without valid evidence that the person had negative intent.

In other words, a person with a hostile attribution bias instinctively believes that others are acting with harmful intentions, even in objectively neutral or ambiguous cases.

For example, if someone accidentally bumps into you while walking on a crowded street, those prone to hostile attribution will view this not as an accident but as immediate hostility towards them. 

This cognitive bias can lead people into trouble, causing them to become detached from reality, act as aggressors in social situations, and automatically assume the worst in others. As a result, such biased thinking often results in interpersonal conflicts.

While hostile attribution bias is often simply a defense mechanism employed by people who feel highly defensive and an acute need to protect themselves, the bias itself should ideally be overcome with a more rational and empirical approach to interpreting others’ intentions.

chrisComprehension Questions: As you read through this article, our editor Chris will pose comprehension and critical thinking questions to help you get the most out of this article. Teachers, if you assign this article for homework, have the students answer these questions at home, then use them as stimuli for in-class discussion.

Definition of Hostile Attribution Bias

Hostile attribution bias is a cognitive distortion and type of attribution bias in which a person perceives other people’s actions as intentionally aggressive, hostile, or negative, even when their behavior might not be intended that way. 

It is a tendency to attribute hostile intentions to others’ behavior without any objective evidence supporting the assumption (Wang et al., 2019).

Wang and colleagues (2018) define hostile attribution bias as:

“…a kind of interpretation bias in which individuals are more likely to interpret ambiguous situations as hostile than benign” (p. 2).

People who suffer from hostile attribution bias tend to interpret ambiguous situations as threatening and view other people’s actions as being directed toward them with malicious intent. 

For example, suppose someone accidentally bumps into you on the street. In that case, those suffering from this bias might assume it was intentional. 

According to Law and Falkenbach (2017),

“Hostile attribution bias (HAB), the tendency to perceive hostility in ambiguous situations, has been linked to aggressive outcomes, such as reactive aggression” (p. 3355).

Studies (e.g. Buck et al., 2020) indicate that hostile attribution bias is prevalent among individuals suffering from cognitive disorders like anxiety and personality disorders, or marginalized people who have experienced discrimination from authority figures or the dominant social group.

However, it can occur in anyone, irrespective of their mental health status (Buck et al., 2020). Hostile attribution bias has significant implications for social interactions and relationships.

For example, people who exhibit this bias may respond aggressively or defensively when they perceive themselves as under attack leading to conflicts and misunderstandings with those around them.

chrisComprehension Checkpoint: Based on the above information, write your own paraphrased definition of hostile attribution bias. Consider using keywords such as “social interactions” and “intentionally hostile.”

Examples of Hostile Attribution Bias

  • Road rage: A driver cuts you off, and your first reaction is to assume that they did it on purpose, even though it could have been accidental. You may get angry and retaliate by honking your horn or yelling out the window.
  • Social media anger: You post a comment online, and someone replies with a different opinion. Your immediate assumption is that they are attacking you personally rather than just disagreeing with your viewpoint.
  • Untrusting relationships: Your partner forgets to do something you asked for, and you assume that they did it intentionally to hurt you rather than forgetting due to busy schedules.
  • Interpersonal conflicts: During an argument with your friend, their facial expression changes slightly –you assume that your friend is being contemptuous rather than holding their emotions in check.
  • Toxic work environments: Your co-worker responds negatively when you ask them something, and you interpret this as their hostility towards you even when they are having a bad day or not feeling well.
  • Frustration when in public: In a packed cinema hall, somebody bumps into you accidentally and without apologizing –you automatically react, presuming that the person was being rude deliberately.
  • Discrimination based on stereotypes: Someone from another ethnicity remarks that you perceive as offensive (though it was not meant to be so), which fuels hostility against them.
  • Blaming the referee: When opposing teams display offenses during the game – players take things personally, attributing hostile intentions rather than competition-driven strategies.
  • Family dynamics: A family member comments about your hair or dress negatively, interpreted as a personal attack leading to arguments when no fault finding occurred.
  • Culture clash: Different cultures have unique communication etiquettes – what might seem friendly for one might be hostile for another, leading to misunderstandings. For instance, using hand gestures while speaking or giving direct eye contact. 
chrisComprehension Checkpoint: Can you come up with some instances in which you may have fallen victim to hostile attribution bias – either as the person who was the aggressor or who got the brunt of someone else’s misinterpretation of your behavior? (If you’ve worked in the service industry, you’ll likely have plenty of examples!)

History of Hostile Attribution Bias

The concept of hostile attribution bias has not been studied in the scientific literature for a long time compared to other psychological concepts. The term itself was first coined by Kenneth Dodge and John Coie in 1987. 

Dodge and Coie conceptualized hostile attribution bias as a type of cognitive bias whereby individuals interpret others’ behavior as being intentionally hostile or aggressive even when there is no clear evidence to support that viewpoint (Fiske, 2018).

However, the idea of hostile attribution bias can be traced back to various psychological theories, such as the frustration-aggression hypothesis proposed by Dollard et al. (1939), which suggested that aggression is an outcome of frustration resulting from obstacles in goal attainment (Berkowitz, 1989).

During the 1960s and 1970s, social psychology studies shed light on ways limited information processing abilities can lead to cognitive biases such as primacy effects and confirmation biases. 

These findings paved the way for future researchers to explore how cognitive biases might influence the interpretation of minimal social cues leading to assault misapprehensions (Fiske, 2018).

Later research throughout the 1980s and 1990s shifted its focus onto pinpointing individual differences between people who are vulnerable versus those resilient towards distorted beliefs. 

Studies identified child-rearing practices that affect children’s abilities to appreciate positive intentions alongside their early instilled beliefs affecting their scrutinizing tendencies (Van Dijk et al., 2018).

Currently, research continues to identify factors contributing towards hostile attribution bias development, its consequences on individuals’ well-being & psychology, along with therapeutic solutions for reducing it.

chrisComprehension Checkpoint: What does the furstration-aggression hypothesis suggest is a key cause of the hostile attribution bias? Do Van Dijk et al. (2018) agree with this hypothesis? 

Reasons for Hostile Attribution Bias

The origins of hostile attribution bias are still not entirely known. However, research suggests that several factors may contribute to its development – from early childhood experiences to media influence.

Here is a brief overview of some possible contributing factors:

  • Early childhood experiences: Experiences in early childhood can shape how individuals perceive the world around them and influence their beliefs, attitudes, and emotional responses. For example, children who grow up in violent or abusive environments may develop a heightened sensitivity to threats and assume that everyone is potentially hostile (Van Dijk et al., 2018).
  • Social interactions: Negative social interactions such as bullying or discrimination can also contribute to developing hostile attribution bias among adults who have experienced those actions in the past (Wang et al., 2019).
  • Cognitive processes: Studies suggest that some individuals are more prone to developing present-centered attention. Consequently, they may get deeply absorbed in a particular possible bad outcome instead of objectively analyzing the situation, leading to mistaken assumptions.
  • Personality traits: Individuals with certain personality traits, such as high neuroticism or aggressive tendencies, may be more likely to interpret ambiguous social cues as threatening, leading to wrong assumptions (Wang et al., 2019).
  • Cultural norms: Communication preferences vary across cultures. In Western societies direct communication is often preferred whereas in certain areas of Asia indirectness is valued more highly. This can create challenges and misinterpretations when people from differing cultural backgrounds interact (Dodge et al. 2015).
  • Media portrayal: How crime stories are represented on TV, films, and news can fuel the perception of other people’s motives, thereby biasing attributions.
chrisComprehension Checkpoint: Of the above factors, identify which are dispositional factors and which are environmental factors. To help with this task, you may need to consult my articles on dispositional and environmental factors. 

Consequences of Hostile Attribution Bias

Hostile attribution bias can have significant negative consequences for individuals, their relationships, and the wider community (Chen et al., 2012).

Here are some consequences of hostile attribution bias:

  • Interpersonal conflicts: People with hostile attribution bias often assume that others’ actions are hostile or negative, leading to misunderstandings and conflicts in social interactions. This may lead to poor social skills and limited opportunities for developing emotional bonds with others.
  • Aggression: Individuals with hostile attribution bias may respond to perceived hostility with verbal or physical aggression, which can escalate conflicts further and cause harm to themselves & others around them, leading to criminal behavior.
  • Negative self-talk: Constantly interpreting other people’s behaviors as hostile can impact self-esteem and confidence in their own ability to interact socially.
  • Anxiety and depression: Habitually anticipating negative outcomes leads people towards a state of hyper-vigilance engendering anxiety which could transition into depressive symptoms over time.
  • Relationship challenges: Maintaining relationships requires collaboration, which may involve repairing unintentional mistakes. However, due to attribution bias, even small mistakes such as forgetting something, can trigger intense reactions that make forgiveness almost impossible, ultimately leading to social isolation.
  • Health issues: Chronic anger brought by attributing hostility affects overall health, such as high blood pressure, cardiovascular diseases, etc.

Ways to Deal with Hostile Attribution Bias

Dealing with hostile attribution bias is important to maintaining healthy relationships, so it should include practicing self-awareness, mindfully challenging negative thoughts, and building better communication skills

If you or someone you know struggles with hostile attribution bias, here are a few strategies that can be helpful:

1. Practice Self-Awareness

It’s essential to be aware of how hostile attribution bias affects your thinking and perception. Identify recurring negative thoughts towards benign interactions, and note them down (Van Dijk et al., 2018).

See Also: 101 Examples of Self-Awareness

2. Evaluate the Evidence-Supporting Thoughts

When feeling anxious or feeling negativity about social situations, try to rationally analyze what specifically leads to those biased thoughts and the evidence supporting them. 

Attempting to provide alternative interpretations is also important without jumping straight away to conclusions.

3. Challenge Assumptions

Once negative automatic thoughts surface, retrospecting over their logical validity may be fruitful such as levels of absurdity, threats perceived, etc. 

Subsequently, contemplating if a reasonable alternative interpretation exists can aid in creating empathy instead of aggression (Dodge et al., 2015).

4. Seek Counseling Treatment

Working with trained professionals specialized in Cognitive Behavioural Therapy Techniques (CBT) might help reduce cognitive distortions creating practical steps for responding positively to ambiguous cues (Orim et al., 2022).

5. Social Communication

Learning how the interpretation of social cues can differ due to cultural norms and linguistic exchanges, setting realistic expectations of interaction, and avoiding spontaneous assumptions given their context-led expressions can improve communication flow.


Hostile attribution bias is a cognitive distortion that can significantly impact the way individuals interpret social cues and interact with others. 

However, from research, it’s clear that through both psychotherapeutic techniques and reflective self-improvement strategies such as mindfulness, one can approach situations cognitively that enable fair expectations of an individual’s intentions.

Hostile attribution bias arises from various factors such as past negative experiences, individual personality styles, and societal norms, creating anxious responses in individuals resulting in negative outcomes. 

By understanding our own cognitive biases and interpreting social cues based on objective evidence, we can empower ourselves to adopt healthier social practices. 

This can result in better conflict resolution within family and workplace environments, ultimately promoting sustainable happiness for everyone around us.


Berkowitz, L. (1989). Frustration-aggression hypothesis: Examination and reformulation. Psychological Bulletin106(1), 59–73.

Buck, B., Browne, J., Gagen, E. C., & Penn, D. L. (2020). Hostile attribution bias in schizophrenia-spectrum disorders: Narrative review of the literature and persisting questions. Journal of Mental Health, 1–18.

Chen, P., Coccaro, E. F., & Jacobson, K. C. (2012). Hostile attributional bias, negative emotional responding, and aggression in adults: Moderating effects of gender and impulsivity. Aggressive Behavior38(1), 47–63.

Dodge, K. A., Malone, P. S., Lansford, J. E., Sorbring, E., Skinner, A. T., Tapanya, S., Tirado, L. M. U., Zelli, A., Alampay, L. P., Al-Hassan, S. M., Bacchini, D., Bombi, A. S., Bornstein, M. H., Chang, L., Deater-Deckard, K., Di Giunta, L., Oburu, P., & Pastorelli, C. (2015). Hostile attributional bias and aggressive behavior in global context. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences112(30), 9310–9315.

Fiske, S. T. (2018). Social beings: Core motives in social psychology. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Law, H., & Falkenbach, D. M. (2017). Hostile attribution bias as a mediator of the relationships of psychopathy and narcissism with aggression. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology62(11), 3355–3371.×17742614

Orim, M. A., Orim, S. O., Adeleke, P. O., Essien, E. E., Olayi, J. E., Essien, C. K., Dada, O. A., Ewa, J. A., Eke, V. U., Igba, I. U., Ogar, R. O., & Owan, V. J. (2022). Cognitive behavioral therapy as treatment intervention for aggressive behaviors in clients with intellectual disabilities and concomitant mental health conditions. Journal of Education and Health Promotion11(1), 395.

Van Dijk, A., De Castro, B. O., Thomaes, S., & Poorthuis, A. M. G. (2018). “Was it meant to be mean?” Young children’s hostile attributional bias and intent attribution skills. Social Development27(4), 683–698.

Van Dijk, A., Thomaes, S., Poorthuis, A. M. G., & Orobio de Castro, B. (2018). Can self-persuasion reduce hostile attribution bias in young children? Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology47(6), 989–1000.

Wang, Y., Cao, S., Dong, Y., & Xia, L.-X. (2019). Hostile attribution bias and angry rumination: A longitudinal study of undergraduate students. PLOS ONE14(5), e0217759.

Wang, Y., Zhu, W., Xiao, M., Zhang, Q., Zhao, Y., Zhang, H., Chen, X., Zheng, Y., & Xia, L.-X. (2018). Hostile attribution bias mediates the relationship between structural variations in the left middle frontal gyrus and trait angry rumination. Frontiers in Psychology9, 1–8.

Viktoriya Sus

Viktoriya Sus (MA)

+ posts

Viktoriya Sus is an academic writer specializing mainly in economics and business from Ukraine. She holds a Master’s degree in International Business from Lviv National University and has more than 6 years of experience writing for different clients. Viktoriya is passionate about researching the latest trends in economics and business. However, she also loves to explore different topics such as psychology, philosophy, and more.

Website | + posts

This article was peer-reviewed and edited by Chris Drew (PhD). The review process on Helpful Professor involves having a PhD level expert fact check, edit, and contribute to articles. Reviewers ensure all content reflects expert academic consensus and is backed up with reference to academic studies. Dr. Drew has published over 20 academic articles in scholarly journals. He is the former editor of the Journal of Learning Development in Higher Education and holds a PhD in Education from ACU.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *