Final answer:
Henry's response exemplifies the 'actor-observer bias,' where we attribute our own behavior to situational factors but others' behavior to their personalities.
Step-by-step explanation:
Understanding Attribution Biases
Attribution biases are critical to understanding social psychology, influencing how we interpret our own behavior and that of others. Two well-known biases are the fundamental attribution error and the actor-observer bias.
The fundamental attribution error is a tendency to overemphasize personality traits and underestimate situational factors when explaining the behavior of others. For example, seeing someone act aggressively and assuming they are an aggressive person, without considering external factors that may have prompted that behavior.
The actor-observer bias refers to a pattern wherein individuals attribute their actions to external, situational factors, but when observing others, they attribute their behavior to internal dispositions. This is often because the 'actor' has more detailed knowledge of the situational factors influencing their behavior than an 'observer' does.
As outlined in the scenario regarding Henry's response, it indicates an actor-observer bias. This is because when we predict our own behavior we often consider situational factors, whereas when predicting others' behavior we tend to overlook the situation and focus on dispositional factors.
Finally, biases like self-serving bias and confirmation bias protect our self-esteem and support existing beliefs, respectively, but do not apply as directly to Henry's scenario as the actor-observer bias does.