There is hardly anything on the group-serving bias page so you will be greatly improving it. The opening sentence for the lead paragraph is a good one to keep. I don't know if it's just me, but I feel like the studies you have in the opening paragraph may be better in the body of the article. But they do a good job of helping explain your topic. I thought the cultural differences section was good and interesting and you have great references. Maybe you could put the sentences in the lead paragraph that are talking about Hindus and Muslims in the cultural differences section. If I think of other stuff or topics for you to hit on I'll be sure to let you know! (Kevinwilliams18 (talk) 16:50, 19 April 2012 (UTC))
The overall topic of group-serving bias is apparent, but was your main focus group-serving bias or the differences between Americans, Chinese, and Japanese? The lead section is a very good start, but I think it should be expanded if possible. Perhaps you could briefly describe how self-serving bias is different. Also, you use a lot of terminology that may not be easily understood by someone without a background in Psychology. Maybe you should create a link to the wikipedia NFCC page. If you're not sure how to do that, there is a cheat sheet posted on blackboard. I think that putting group-serving bias and Cultural differences all in one heading is too much. I'm not sure if you have enough research to divide these into two different headings, but I think that would help the article flow better. You did a very good job of covering this material in a non-biased way because you listed many differences between cultures but did not state any preference for them. Lastly, the fact that you have at least so far used only scientific journals as references is a sign of good research! Jaclyn turpin (talk) 01:34, 20 April 2012 (UTC)jaclyn turpinJaclyn turpin (talk) 01:34, 20 April 2012 (UTC)