I may have misunderstood you here, but I interpret the correspondence bias differently. Correcting for it doesn't mean you should necessarily always put more weight on the situational explanation than the personality, which your example clearly shows would sometimes lead to mistakes. It means that you mostly don't give it as much weight as you should.

The context by which the correspondence bias tends to be assessed, however, are in artificial environments where it leads to incorrect conclusions. How do we judge whether we give the correct weight or not?

Does this sound like something you could agree with?

I have no idea where to place my priors on the possibility of a strong correlation; I'd guess that low rationalization is associated both with high and low FAE (owing to virtue ethics on one tail and rationalists on the other), and that the middle is a bit of a wash. My inclination is to look for studies. Know of any?