Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
References for this paper are not available at this time. We will be adding them shortly, thank you for your patience.
Many critics of contemporary work in attribution have called for a more “social” approach. In response to this concern, the present study addressed the neglected question of how realistic differences between groups are explained. A total of 56 members of two Hong Kong universities were asked to explain eight accepted facts distinguishing the two groups to an experimenter and a future audience from one or the other group. Four of the eight facts favored each of the universities. Results showed students of both universities making group-serving attributions, this bias being more marked on the explanations made by the lower-status group. The favorability of the facts to one's own group and the group identity of the experimenter/audience had no impact on the attributions made. These results are discussed in terms of Tajfel's (1978) social identity theory, providing support for its applicability in a collectivist culture emphasizing harmony. Peonies, though pretty, need green leaves as a backdrop.—From The Dream of the Red Chamber by Cho Suet Kan (A.D. 1717–1763)
Social Cognition – Guilford Press
Published: Jun 1, 1983
Read and print from thousands of top scholarly journals.
Already have an account? Log in
Bookmark this article. You can see your Bookmarks on your DeepDyve Library.
To save an article, log in first, or sign up for a DeepDyve account if you don’t already have one.
Copy and paste the desired citation format or use the link below to download a file formatted for EndNote
Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
All DeepDyve websites use cookies to improve your online experience. They were placed on your computer when you launched this website. You can change your cookie settings through your browser.