We suggest that intentionality attributed to dissenting behavior in intergroup contexts (e.g., exposing one’s country’s secrets) may be conceptualized as benefitting one of four social circles. Two social circles exclude the perceiver: (a) the actor him/herself and (b) the outgroup affected by the behavior; and two circles include the perceiver: (c) the ingroup of both the perceiver and the actor and (d) humanity as the ultimate collective including both ingroup and outgroup. We further suggest that adopting different beneficiary attributions depends on the perceivers’ social identity complexity (Roccas & Brewer, 2002), which refers to an individual’s representation of their multiple social identities on a continuum from highly overlapping to highly differentiated (i.e., simple vs. complex social identity). Perceivers are more likely to attribute dissent behavior to social circles that exclude (rather than include) themselves the simpler their social identity; such exclusive attributions lead to harsher moral judgements, expressed as punitiveness.

我们建议归因于群体间环境中的异议行为（例如，揭露一个国家的秘密）的意向性可以被概念化为有利于四个社交圈之一。两个社交圈将感知者排除在外：（a）行为者他/她自己和（b）受行为影响的外群体；两个圈子包括感知者：（c）感知者和行动者的内群体；（d）作为最终集体的人类，包括内群体和外群体。我们进一步建议，采用不同的受益人归因取决于感知者的社会身份复杂性（Roccas & Brewer，2002），这是指个人在从高度重叠到高度分化（即简单与高度差异）的连续统一体上的多重社会身份表征。复杂的社会认同）。感知者更有可能将异见行为归因于排斥（而不是包括）自己的社交圈，他们的社会身份越简单；这种排他性的归因导致更严厉的道德判断，表现为惩罚。