10.1177/0146167204271584 ARTICLE PERSONALITY AND SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY BULLETIN Garcia et al. / INTRAGROUP RESPONSES TO DISCRIMINATION COMPLAINERS Perceivers’ Responses to In-Group and Out-Group Members Who Blame a Negative Outcome on Discrimination Donna M. Garcia April Horstman Reser Rachel B. Amo University of Kansas Sandrine Redersdorff Université Blaise Pascal, France Nyla R. Branscombe University of Kansas The authors extend recent research concerning the social costs of claiming discrimination by examining men’s and women’s responses to in-group and out-group targets who either blamed a failing grade on discrimination or answer quality. Although participants generally responded more negatively to targets who blamed discrimination, rather than answer quality, dislike was greatest and gender group identification was lowest when partic- ipants evaluated an in-group target. Moreover, an in-group tar- get who claimed discrimination was perceived as avoiding per- sonal responsibility for outcomes to a greater extent than was a similar out-group target. Perceptions that the target avoided out- come responsibility by claiming discrimination were shown to mediate the relationship between attribution type and dislike of the in-group target. The authors discuss their results in terms of intragroup processes and suggest that social costs may especially accrue for in-group members when claiming discrimination has implications for the in-group’s social identity. Keywords: social identity; black sheep effect; social costs; attribution; discrimination; complaining A growing body of literature suggests that people avoid blaming negative outcomes on discrimination because they fear that there may be social costs associated with making such claims (Crosby, 1984; Feagin & Sikes, 1994; Kaiser & Miller, 2001; Stangor, Swim, Van Allen, & Sechrist, 2002; Swim & Hyers, 1999). To date, research- ers have focused on either high-status group members’ unfavorable ratings of a low-status out-group member who makes an attribution to discrimination (Kaiser & Miller, 2001, 2003) or low-status group members’ reluc- tance to confront discrimination in the presence of high- status group members (Stangor et al., 2002; Swim & Hyers, 1999). In contrast to these researchers’ emphasis on the intergroup nature of social costs between high- and low-status groups, we propose that the social costs of claiming discrimination are not solely a result of inter- group judgments or the status differences between the groups. Indeed, in-group members, not just out-group members, who make attributions to discrimination are vulnerable to experiencing social costs. Such costs might be greatest for in-group members, when the discrimina- tion claim has the potential of threatening the in-group’s positive identity. COMPLAINING ABOUT DISCRIMINATION Discrimination is ubiquitous in our society. It is evi- dent in a myriad of social, occupational, and educational 769 Authors’ Note: We thank Cheryl Kaiser and Carol Miller for providing us with their research materials for this study. We thank Dan Batson, Elizabeth Collins, Scott Eidelman, Jeff Sherman, and two anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments on an earlier draft of this article. Address correspondence to Donna Garcia, Department of Psychology, University of Kansas, 1415 Jayhawk Blvd., Lawrence, KS 66045-7556; e- mail: d-garcia@ku.edu. PSPB, Vol. 31 No. 6, June 2005 769-780 DOI: 10.1177/0146167204271584 © 2005 by the Society for Personality and Social Psychology, Inc.