Motivated Suspicion: Asymmetrical Attributions of the Behavior of Political Ingroup and Outgroup Members

Abstract

Suspicious attributional thought was assessed in the context of the political behavior of ingroup and outgroup politicians. Strong Democrats and Republicans read a newspaper article describing a Democratic or Republican politician's support of a bill. Half the participants read that the politician may have been motivated by an ulterior motive, obtaining campaign support from companies that benefited from the bill. In two studies, interaction effects revealed that participants discounted the behavior of an outgroup politician when an ulterior motive was salient. In contrast, they failed to discount the behavior of an ingroup politician when an ulterior motive was salient or either politician when no ulterior motive was salient. Study 2 also revealed evidence that negative, other-directed affect mediated the bias in attributional judgments.