Who likes the rebels and who likes the allegiants?The role of membership and status in the judgment of rebel attributions
(2011) Revue Internationale de Psychologie Sociale — Vol. 24, n° 1, p. 83-106 (2011)
Files
Gillesetal_RIPS_2011.pdf
Restricted Access - Adobe PDF
- 288.84 KB
Details
- Authors
- Abstract
- Rebel attributions are less valued than allegiant ones when it comes to explain one’s failure. Nevertheless, rebels can be sometimes positively viewed and even celebrated. We examined the role of inter-group dynamics at stake in the social judgement of such attribution types. 75 males and 75 females judged a male or a female target using allegiant vs. rebel attributions for a negative professional event. We hypothesized and found that high-status members judged the rebel targets less efficacious and less likable than the allegiant target, only when the target was from the in-group. Low-status members judged the in-group target as more efficacious than the out-group target, but judged the rebel target as less likable than the allegiant target. These findings contribute to better understand the intergroup processes underlying the social judgement of rebel attributions, and more broadly the differences in social judgement between attribution types.
- Affiliations
Université de Lausanne Département de Psychologie
Citations
Gilles, I., Scheidegger, R., & Toma, C. (2011). Who likes the rebels and who likes the allegiants?The role of membership and status in the judgment of rebel attributions. Revue Internationale de Psychologie Sociale, 24(1), 83-106. https://hdl.handle.net/2078.5/40643 (Original work published 2011)