Seeing the status of one's language and dialect as a possible cause of social
inferiority may be strengthened by the operation of the covariation principle
(Kelley, 1967). This suggests that an effect is seen to be caused by the factor
with which, over time, it covaries. It is relatively easy to see how children
from lower-status backgrounds might provide themselves with such covariation
data. For example, if an individual perceives that almost everyone who
uses his or her non-standard dialect occupies a relatively low social position,
while almost everyone using the standard dialect occupies a higher one, then
dialect might easily be seen as the cause of the differential status. In
addition, it is easy to see how this covariation rule would be strengthened by
ingroup members who had passed upwards, and were now occupying positions
of higher status. At the same time, it is possible to consider other causal
explanations for the lack of economic and social success of non-standard
dialect speakers; for example, there may exist negative outgroup characteristics.
This kind of explanation derives support from a growing literature
on intergroup attributions (see Hewstone and Jaspars, 1982a). From this
perspective, the individual attributes the behaviour of another to characteristics
and intentions associated with the group to which the other belongs,and not simply to individual ·characteristics. Thus, if the individual is the
recipient of negative behaviour by an outgroup member (e.g. being refused
employment), then the preferred explanation is more likely to be in terms of
negative outgroup attributes (e.g. "they are discriminatory") than in terms
of negative ingroup characteristics (e.g. "we are lazy").