Final answer:
The study by Jones & Harris showed that students attributed debaters' assigned positions on Castro to their personal beliefs, demonstrating a fundamental attribution error, where character is overestimated while situational factors are underestimated.
Step-by-step explanation:
The study by Jones & Harris involved students reading debaters' speeches that were either in support of or attacking the Cuban leader Fidel Castro. The objective of the study was to assess the students' attributions of the debaters' true attitudes based on the positions articulated in the speeches.
The results of the study indicated a fundamental attribution error, meaning that even when the students knew that the debaters' positions were assigned, they still inferred that the speeches reflected the debaters' true attitudes. This suggests that people often attribute others' behaviors to their character rather than to situational factors. The study highlights the human tendency to underestimate the influence of external circumstances when evaluating others' actions.