Group and person attributions in response to criticism of the in-group.

This study examined responses to criticism of the in-group as influenced by critic's group membership and justifiability of the criticism. Participants responded to an article in which the author criticized their school. The critic was presented as a student either at the participant's own school (the in-group) or at a college higher or lower in status than the in-group school. The content of the criticism varied by justifiability. Results demonstrate that attributions associated with the person were greater when the critic was a fellow in-group member, and group attributions were stronger when he or she was a student from the higher status school. Neither attribution type dominated in the low-status out-group condition. The content of the criticism did not influence attributions, and harmfulness of the criticism-rather than justifiability-seemed to influence other responses. Associations between type of attributions (group or person) and affective and other perceptual reactions (e.g. anger, perceived accuracy of statements) also differed by the critic's group membership. Implications for intergroup theory and communication in intergroup conflict are discussed.