For you can't always get what you want: When preconditions are better explanations than goals

Heider (1958) claimed that goals are normally better explanations of actions than preconditions, because people can manipulate the preconditions required for the action. Recent research supporting this view examined common actions where the conditions necessary for the action are readily available. The present studies show that when the preconditions necessary for an action are difficult to obtain, the availability of those conditions comprises a better explanation than the relevant goal. This trend is clearest with actions requiring substantial skills or money, although preconditions also rise in importance with common actions that are obstructed. These findings have important implications for theories of attribution, and they provide the basis for conceptual links between goal‐based theories and covariation models.