Explaining differences between social groups: The impact of group identification on attribution*

A Flemish official interviewed by Van Dam (1997) as part of a large survey on the relations between linguistic groups in Belgium explained the unfavorable situation of Wallonia in comparison with Flanders in the following terms: “Wallonia suffers from a mentality which does not favor economic development. The prevailing culture is socialism. The socialist party sets the tone (...) Walloons tend to turn towards the government when problems arise” (p. 182, our translation). By contrast, a Walloon official explains the relative success of Flanders by its “geographical location (...), the ports in Antwerp and Zeebrugge. Thanks to these ports, a sizeable amount of economic activity passes through Flanders: they enable the region to communicate with the world.” (p. 189). According to the first explanation, the economic disparities between the two regions are due to internal characteristics (their “culture”, their “mentality”). The second explanation focuses on external factors (their geographical environment). Which factors may induce group members to favor one type of explanation at the expense of the other? Explaining differences between social groups: The impact of group identification on attribution*