Yes in the example the person is viewing a single tendency in an example and acting in a damaging way because of that. It may be more accurate for the speaker to say that he saw a group of Asian people sleeping on a plane and none waved back, while the Hispanic person who was awake, did.
A specific form of the causation-correlation logical fallacy, where a person looks at different tendencies that happen to align among people of different ethnicities
That implies there is a genuine difference in the aggregate group-level behavior. A proper example would be
Black people commit crimes at a disproportionate rate compared to Whites. This is because Black people are inherently more violent and criminal than Whites.
The second sentence doesn’t necessarily follow from the first, because there could be other factors that cause Blacks to be more violent.
Your examples are fallacies of generalizing from small and/or unrepresentative samples, not fallacies of inferring causation from correlation.
The example doesn’t match the definition.
Yes in the example the person is viewing a single tendency in an example and acting in a damaging way because of that. It may be more accurate for the speaker to say that he saw a group of Asian people sleeping on a plane and none waved back, while the Hispanic person who was awake, did.
No it’s still not right.
That implies there is a genuine difference in the aggregate group-level behavior. A proper example would be
Black people commit crimes at a disproportionate rate compared to Whites. This is because Black people are inherently more violent and criminal than Whites.
The second sentence doesn’t necessarily follow from the first, because there could be other factors that cause Blacks to be more violent.
Your examples are fallacies of generalizing from small and/or unrepresentative samples, not fallacies of inferring causation from correlation.