Abstract
This experiment addresses the relation between the ‘Linguistic intergroup bias’ (that is, the tendency to describe positive in‐group and negative out‐group behaviours in more abstract terms than negative in‐group and positive out‐group behaviours) and the locus of causality and stability implicit in verbs. Subjects were presented with episodes of successful and unsuccessful interactions involving in‐group or out‐group protagonists. Applying Semin & Fiedler's (1988) ‘Linguistic category model’, subjects were asked to choose between two explanations of each episode, one expressed in more concrete interpretive action verbs (implying high subject causation but low stability), the other expressed in more abstract state verbs (implying low subject causation but high stability). Results show that negative in‐group and positive out‐group behaviours were described in more concrete terms despite the greater subject causation implicit in such verbs.
Published Version
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call