Group membership shapes how observers explain desirable behavior

Evidence

Earlier researchers certainly noted the potential influence of categorical information on causal attribution. Specifically, Jones and McGillis (1976) proposed that a category-based expectancy, as compared with a target-based expectancy, can either mitigate or augment correspondence inference. For instance, the statement, “I really love a Honda,” will be more likely attributed to the speaker’s true attitude (i.e., an internal attribution) when it is discovered that the person works for Toyota rather than Honda. The mismatch between the expectancy for a Toyota employee and the behavior is assumed to lead to a “noncommon effect.” The influence of categorical expectancies can also take a special form in the in-group versus out-group context. According to the study of “ultimate attribution error” (Hewstone, 1990; Pettigrew, 1979), desirable behaviors by in-group members tend to be attributed to the actor’s dispositions, whereas equally desirable behavior displayed by an out-group member is attributed to situations, or unstable causes such as “exceptional effort.” — Roderick M. Kramer, Geoffrey J. Leonardelli, Robert W. Livingston, Social Cognition, Social Identity, and…, 114

Categorization

• XREF: Directly corroborates the reader’s existing Allport thread on ingroup/outgroup attribution asymmetry; also speaks to the earlier connection-point notes on how group-based expectancies frame identity signaling (compare the Reader-taste learned examples on impersonal trust and signaling).
• corroborated: 2 independent passages support this claim — Roderick M. Kramer, Geoffrey J. Leonardelli, Robert W. Livingston, Social Cognition, Social Identity, and…, 114