People explain behavior by referencing an actor’s group membership rather than unique traits.

Evidence

I argue that categorical expectations play a significant role not only in impression formation but also in explanations of observed behavior. More often than not, people refer to a category or group membership of the actor in their attempt to figure out the cause of or the reason for an observed behavior. For instance, an Asian woman’s high scores in math exams may be more easily accounted for by her ethnicity rather than by her unique individual dispositions such as her exceptional level of effort or interest in the subject. Alternatively, an outstanding performance by a member of a disadvantaged group may call for praise of his or her talent exactly because the category membership augments dispositional attributions (cf. Jones & McGillis, 1976). — Roderick M. Kramer, Geoffrey J. Leonardelli, Robert W. Livingston, Social Cognition, Social Identity, and…, 109

Categorization

• XREF: Connects to attribution theory (Kelley’s covariation model, correspondence bias) and to stereotype-consistent-vs-inconsistent attribution research like the Asian math stereotype. — connects to: Some queer educators teach as co-learners rather than as identity-based role models. — James D. Kirylo (ed.), Reinventing Pedagogy of the Oppressed:…, 1263
• STORYSTEM: The ‘disadvantaged group member’s success credited to category rather than effort’ dynamic is a rich engine for a character whose achievement is continually re-narrated by others.