Prototypes of Discrimination: How Status Asymmetry and Stereotype Asymmetry Affect Judgments of Racial Discrimination

This research investigated status asymmetry and stereotype asymmetry features of the racial discrimination prototype. Consistent with status asymmetry predictions, Black observers made greater attributions to discrimination when the victim was Black and the perpetrator was White than when the roles were reversed. In contrast, White observers made similar attributions to discrimination, regardless of status asymmetry. In partial support of the stereotype asymmetry hypothesis, Black and White observers made greater attributions to discrimination for Black victims in a domain where Blacks are negatively stereotyped than positively stereotyped. However, attributions to discrimination for White victims were unaffected by the domain.     

Why did you choose that person over me? Ingroup rejection and attributions to discrimination

The present research examined the attributions that people make when an individual rejects a member of his or her own group in favor of a member of an outgroup (i.e., ingroup rejection). Study 1 showed that Latinos rejected by an ingroup member (perpetrator) made more attributions to discrimination than Whites under similar circumstances. Study 2 showed that Latinos made more attributions to discrimination for ingroup rejection when the perpetrator was Latino as compared to when the perpetrator was White, whereas Whites' attributions to discrimination were relatively low regardless of perpetrator's ethnicity. Study 3 showed that priming loyalty norms increased attributions to discrimination among Latinos in response to ingroup rejection, but not in response to outgroup rejection. This research brings a new perspective to discrimination research by focusing on intragroup rejection and nonprototypical cases of discrimination.     

In the Eye of the Beholder: Do Behavior and Character Affect Victim and Perpetrator Responsibility for Acquaintance Rape?1

Acquaintance rape attributions of responsibility were investigated. In Study 1, participants viewed videotapes that varied the female victim's resistance (verbal, physical, verbal/physical) and the reaction of the perpetrator (anger, no reaction) or a control videotape. The victim was held less responsible and the perpetrator was held more responsible when the victim resisted. In Study 2, participants viewed videotapes that manipulated victim and perpetrator reputation. Victims were held more responsible when they had a bad reputation; perpetrators were held more responsible when the victim had a good reputation or the perpetrator had a bad reputation. Hostile sexism predicted victim responsibility in both studies; rape myth predicted victim and perpetrator responsibility in Study 2. Implications for the legal system are discussed.     

When Do Men and Women Make Attributions to Gender Discrimination? The Role of Discrimination Source

Two experiments examined the effects of discrimination source on men’s and women’s willingness to make attributions to a sexist experimenter or sexist rules. Students (161 male; 171 females) at a US university were exposed to a discriminatory person, discriminatory rule, or no discrimination. “Experiment 1” demonstrated individuals were less likely to make attributions to a sexist person than an unfair rule, and women were especially reluctant to indicate a person was responsible for their discrimination even when a person was the source. “Experiment 2” showed participants were less likely to indicate an experimenter, and even a rule, was sexist when there was a cost to the perpetrator (i.e., advisor would be notified of the perpetrator’s actions) for making such attributions.     

The evaluation of perpetrators and victims of peer victimization: An extended crossed‐categorization approach

This research uses a crossed‐categorization design for examining the perception of peer victimization. Using vignettes and an experimental design, perpetrator and victim evaluations of Dutch and Turkish‐Dutch early adolescents were examined in terms of ethnic and gender similarities between (1) respondent and perpetrator, (2) respondent and victim, and (3) perpetrator and victim. When the perpetrator was a double‐ingroup member of the respondent (same ethnicity and same gender), perpetrators were evaluated less negatively and victims less positively than when the perpetrator was a single (gender or ethnicity) or double‐outgroup member. Further, when the victim was a double‐ingroup member of the respondent, perpetrators were evaluated more negatively and victims more positively. No perpetrator–victim crossed‐categorization effects were found for perpetrator and victim evaluations. Perceived norms of intervention in the classroom had the expected main effects but did not moderate the crossed‐categorization effects. The usefulness of a crossed‐categorization approach for examining the perception of negative peer behavior is discussed. Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Attributions of Blame in Sexual Assault to Perpetrators and Victims of Both Genders1

Previous research found that men attribute more blame to rape victims than do women; men also attribute less blame to perpetrators. In rape situations with a male perpetrator and a female victim, the roles of perpetrator and victim are confounded with gender category. To determine whether men are more lenient toward perpetrators or toward other males, the present study examined attributions of blame in scenarios that varied the gender category of both perpetrator and victim. Results showed that men's and women's attributions of blame to perpetrators were based on the role that was enacted, rather than gender per se: Men attributed less blame to perpetrators than did women, regardless of the perpetrator's gender category, indicating that men were more lenient toward perpetrators than were women. In addition, when the victim was female, the perpetrator was blamed more and the victim was blamed less than when the victim was male.     

Club Drug Use and Intentionality in Perceptions of Rape Victims

The purpose of the present study was to examine whether intentionality of alcohol or club drug use would affect observer attributions of a victim and a perpetrator after a sexual assault. Participants were 198 male and female college students sampled from a small college located in the United States. In general, participants attributed less blame to the victim, more guilt to the perpetrator, and were more likely to define the assault as rape and convict the perpetrator when the substance use was involuntary as opposed to voluntary. Participants also attributed more blame to the victim and less pleasure to the perpetrator when the sexual assault involved GHB as opposed to Everclear. Implications of these findings are discussed.     

Attributions About Acquaintance Rape: The Role of Alcohol and Individual Differences1

Reactions to an acquaintance rape scenario were examined for effects of respondent gender and portrayals of different levels of alcohol intoxication on attributions of responsibility and blame. Comparisons of conditions in which both victim and perpetrator were described as experiencing equivalent levels of intoxication revealed that participants rated the victim as more, but the perpetrator as less, responsible and blameworthy after consuming alcohol-particularly when drinking was accompanied by clear signs of behavioral impairment. In contrast, when the victim was more intoxicated and impaired than her assailant, intoxication of the perpetrator did not serve to excuse his behavior, but actually incriminated him more. Women generally assigned more blame to the victim. Individual differences in rape myth acceptance also influenced attributions.     

When fiends become friends: the need to belong and perceptions of personal and group discrimination

The present article examines the role that the need to belong (NTB) plays in people's judgments of personal and group discrimination and in the attributions people make for potentially discriminatory evaluations. The authors hypothesized that the NTB motivates people to conclude that (a) whereas they rarely experience personal discrimination, (b) their fellow in-group members do experience discrimination. In Study 1, people high in the NTB reported experiencing lower than average levels of personal and higher than average levels of group discrimination. In Study 2, an experimental manipulation of the NTB yielded similar results. In Study 3, women who were motivated to be accepted by a bogus male participant were less likely to attribute his negative evaluations of their work to prejudice.     

Children's perceptions of gender discrimination

Children (N = 76; ages 5-10 years) participated in a study designed to examine perceptions of gender discrimination. Children were read scenarios in which a teacher determined outcomes for 2 students (1 boy and 1 girl). Contextual information (i.e., teacher's past behavior), the gender of the target of discrimination (i.e., student), and the gender of the perpetrator (i.e., teacher) were manipulated. Results indicated that older children were more likely than younger children to make attributions to discrimination when contextual information suggested that it was likely. Girls (but not boys) were more likely to view girls than boys as victims of discrimination, and children with egalitarian gender attitudes were more likely to perceive discrimination than were their peers.     

The role of reporting in the evaluation of rape victims

In three studies, we examined how individuals evaluate a rape victim based on whether she reports or does not report her rapist. Across all three studies, a victim who did not report the perpetrator was evaluated more negatively than a victim who did report the perpetrator. In Studies 2 and 3, symbolic concerns (the view that the victim’s actions violated shared values and disempowered herself) mediated the effect of reporting on evaluation of the victim. The effects of the victim’s relationship to the perpetrator (Study 1) and the victim’s decision to forgive the perpetrator (Study 2) were also examined. Results indicate that observers evaluate victims who do not report their perpetrators more negatively, and that this evaluation may be the result of perceptions of not reporting rape as a transgression.     

Variation in the Application of the “Promiscuous Female” Stereotype and the Nature of the Application Domain: Influences on Sexual Harassment Judgments after Exposure to the Jerry Springer Show

This study was designed to explore how the impact of exposure to a few stereotyped group members can be mediated by individual variation in stereotype application to other group members. When compared to participants exposed to nonpromiscuous women on an episode of the Jerry Springer Show, those exposed to promiscuous women perceived a victim of sexual harassment as less traumatized and more responsible for the event. In addition, exposure condition had no impact on judgments when the man physically touched the victim. Conversely, when he made a verbal comment or verbal request, those in the promiscuous condition reported perceptions of less victim trauma and made greater attributions of victim responsibility. The findings also indicate that the effects of exposure to the promiscuous woman depictions were mediated by individual variation in attributions of victim promiscuity. Finally, activation of the promiscuous female stereotype was also shown to have generalized to judgments of women in a nonsexual domain.     

The role of perpetrator similarity in reactions toward innocent victims

Building and extending on just world theory, this paper studies people's negative reactions to innocent victims of rape or sexual assault. Specifically, we focus on an as yet unexplored variable that may help to explain these reactions, namely whether the perpetrator of the crime was similar or dissimilar to people who observed what happened to the victim. Perpetrator similarity refers to whether the perpetrator belongs to the personal world of the observer or not, and in accordance with predictions derived from just world theory, findings of three studies reveal that especially men take more physical distance from an innocent victim (Study 1) and blame (Study 2) and derogate (Study 3) an innocent victim more when the perpetrator is similar to them as opposed to when the perpetrator is different from them. Implications are discussed. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Sexual preference, gender, and blame attributions in adolescent sexual assault

The study investigated the impact of victim sexual orientation, perpetrator gender, and participant gender on judgements toward a 15-year-old male victim of a depicted sexual assault. One hundred and eight-eight participants (97 male, 91 female) read a hypothetical scenario depicting the sexual assault of a 15-year-old male victim where the victim's sexual orientation and the perpetrator's gender were varied between subjects. Participants then completed a questionnaire assessing their attributions toward both the victim and the perpetrator. Results revealed that male participants blamed the victim more than female participants when the victim was both gay and attacked by a male perpetrator. All participants, regardless of gender, made more positive judgements toward the female as opposed to male perpetrator. Results are discussed in relation to gender role stereotypes and homophobia.     

Effects of perpetrator gender and victim sexuality on blame toward male victims of sexual assault

Most researchers who have investigated attributions of blame toward victims in sexual-assault depictions have considered only female victims of male perpetrators. Few researchers have investigated the effects of perpetrator gender or victim sexual orientation on blame attributions toward male victims. The present authors investigated those two variables. Participants were 161 undergraduates at a British university in social science courses, each of whom read one scenario of a set in which perpetrator gender and victim sexual orientation were varied between subjects, and who completed a questionnaire measuring their blame toward the victim and the perpetrator. The present results showed that male participants blamed the victim more if a person of the gender that he was normally attracted to assaulted him. Male participants also regarded the female perpetrator in more favorable terms than they did the male perpetrator regardless of the victim's sexual orientation. The authors discussed the present results in relation to gender role stereotypes.     

Sexual Preference,Gender, and Blame Attributions in Adolescent Sexual Assault

ABSTRACT

The study investigated the impact of victim sexual orientation, perpetrator gender, and participant gender on judgements toward a 15-year-old male victim of a depicted sexual assault. One hundred and eight-eight participants (97 male, 91 female) read a hypothetical scenario depicting the sexual assault of a 15-year-old male victim where the victim's sexual orientation and the perpetrator's gender were varied between subjects. Participants then completed a questionnaire assessing their attributions toward both the victim and the perpetrator. Results revealed that male participants blamed the victim more than female participants when the victim was both gay and attacked by a male perpetrator. All participants, regardless of gender, made more positive judgements toward the female as opposed to male perpetrator. Results are discussed in relation to gender role stereotypes and homophobia.     

Making Attributions to and Plans to Confront Gender Discrimination: The Role of Optimism

Three studies demonstrated that optimism increased women's plans to confront gender discrimination. Furthermore, these studies showed that this relation was not a result of attributions to discrimination or perceptions of discriminatory events. Rather, as demonstrated in Study 3, the reason optimists were more likely to indicate that they would confront sexism was that they take an active approach to dealing with discriminatory feedback and expect to have successful outcomes in confronting their perpetrator.     

Group identification moderates emotional responses to perceived prejudice

Two studies tested the prediction that group identification (importance of the group in the self-concept) moderates the impact of perceived discrimination on self-evaluative emotions (depression and self-esteem). In Study 1, women low in gender identification experienced less depressed emotion and higher self-esteem if a negative evaluation was due to sexism than when it was not. The self-evaluative emotions of women high in gender identification were not buffered by attributions to sexism. In Study 2, ethnic identification and depressed emotions were positively related when Latino-Americans read about pervasive prejudice against the ingroup but were negatively related when they read about prejudice against an outgroup. Both studies demonstrated that for highly group identified individuals, prejudice against the ingroup is a threat against the self. Thus, the self-protective strategy of attributing negative feedback to discrimination may be primarily effective for individuals who do not consider the group a central aspect of self.     

Everyday magical powers: the role of apparent mental causation in the overestimation of personal influence

These studies examined whether having thoughts related to an event before it occurs leads people to infer that they caused the event--even when such causation might otherwise seem magical. In Study 1, people perceived that they had harmed another person via a voodoo hex. These perceptions were more likely among those who had first been induced to harbor evil thoughts about their victim. In Study 2, spectators of a peer's basketball-shooting performance were more likely to perceive that they had influenced his success if they had first generated positive visualizations consistent with that success. Observers privy to those spectators' visualizations made similar attributions about the spectators' influence. Finally, additional studies suggested that these results occur even when the thought-about outcome is viewed as unwanted by the thinker and even in field settings where the relevant outcome is occurring as part of a live athletic competition.     

The Case of the Guilty Victim: The Effects of Gender of Victim and Gender of Perpetrator on Attributions of Blame and Responsibility

This study was designed to investigate the effects of gender on attributions of blame, responsibility, and recommended sentencing in a sexualized crime scenario with a 2 (perpetrator gender) by 2 (victim gender) by 2 (participant gender) between-subjects design. There was an interaction of gender of perpetrator and gender of victim such that female victims were held less responsible and their perpetrators were judged more harshly, especially when the perpetrator was male. Male victims were held the most responsible, especially when the perpetrator was male. Individual difference analyses indicated that attitude toward sexual minorities was the best predictor of judgments. Belief in a just world was not predictive of dependent measures. Attributions of blame and perceived defense adequacy were predictors of assigned penalty.