Italian male school children, ranging in age from 7 to 10 years, were identified as at‐risk children on the basis of self‐reports, teacher questionnaires, and peer nominations assessing aggression, emotional instability, and pro‐social behaviour. Together with a normal control sample, these children participated in two studies guided by attribtional theory. In Study 1, following teacher emotional feedback of anger or sympathy for failure, attributional inferences regarding low ability or lack of effort as the cause of that failure were rated. In Study 2, controllable and uncontrollable causes of a social transgression were given, and participants rated the anticipated anger of the ‘victim’ and their intention to withhold or reveal the cause. Strong effects for both populations that were consistent with attributional predictions were reported. In addition, differences between the inferences, expectations, and behavioural intentions of the populations were found, with at‐risk children being less likely to perceive sympathy as a cue for low ability, and anticipating more anger from others following a transgression, particularly when there was a ‘good’ (i.e. uncontrollable) reason for the broken social agreement. It was contended that the results support the social‐cognitive approach to the understanding of mechanisms of risk and deviancy.
