Rational model and justification model in ‘outcome bias’

The authors of this study suggest that the harm‐punishment link (‘outcome bias’) can be explained by the activation of different judgment processes depending on the outcome severity of an offense: (1) a rational model for mild outcomes in which punishment is necessarily linked to responsibility of the perpetrator; (2) a justification model for severe outcomes in which punishment and responsibility are linked only when assessment order allows the latter to rationalize the former. Participants (126 university students) considered an unintentional road accident with mild or severe outcomes and made judgments of responsibility, punishment, and perceived seriousness of the offense. The results support the authors' hypothesis. In the discussion, the authors suggest different motives of punishment (preventive or compensative justice) which explain why responsibility and punishment are not necessarily linked. Copyright © 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

信念与结果对道德、法律责任判断的影响

在"执行者"和"旁观者"两个情境中,通过操纵当事人的信念和事件结果,考察了被试的道德与法律责任判断。结果显示:进行道德责任判断时,被试对当事人的信念信息更敏感;进行法律责任判断时,则对事件结果的信息更敏感。"执行者"情境中的道德和法律责任评分均高于"旁观者"情境中的责任评分。这说明道德、法律责任判断的内部机制有所不同,并且当事人的不同角色导致第三方对其的责任判断出现差异。     

Not all missed opportunities cast the same shadow: Voluntary inaction reduces the “sting” of missed sales promotions

How do consumers who miss extremely attractive sales promotions respond to merely attractive opportunities they later encounter when prices return to higher levels? The literature on inaction inertia suggests that the more attractive the missed opportunity, the less likely a consumer is to accept the subsequently encountered inferior opportunity, indicating that consumers may stay undecided. Thus, consumers are believed to be negatively influenced by the shadow of the attractive opportunities they missed. This has adverse consequences for both consumer and firm welfare. Yet, we sometimes do see consumers buying even after missing a sale. We draw from the literature on regret and personal responsibility to hypothesize the conditions that would allow the consumer to remain uninfluenced by the attractiveness of the missed opportunity. In three studies, we find support for the idea that personal responsibility for missing the first opportunity allows consumers to be less influenced by its attractiveness when they see a second inferior opportunity compared to conditions in which they were not personally responsible for missing the first opportunity; this bodes well both for consumer and marketer welfare.     

Self-serving bias in the attribution of responsibility: Cognitive versus motivational explanations

The purpose of this study is to compare the cognitive and motivational explanations of differences in the responsibility assigned to the victim of a crime. It has generally been found that the victim of a crime is assigned more responsibility for that crime by similar others if its consequences are severe. The motivational explanation for this finding is that subjects are threatened by the idea that a serious crime can happen by chance. The cognitive explanation is that serious crimes are rarer and subjects attribute more of the responsibility for rarer events to those who experience them. This study tested these two explanations by independently varying the severity and the likelihood of a crime and examining attributions of responsibility to its victim. The results of the study support the cognitive explanation. Similar others were found to attribute more responsibility for a crime to the victim when that crime was presented as rare, irrespective of whether its consequences were mild or severe. In addition, when likelihood was controlled experimentally no effect of severity upon attributions of responsibility was found. These results suggest that, within the context of attributions of responsibility to victims, patterns of attribution consistent with those predicted by theories suggesting motivational influences upon attribution may actually represent the operation of cognitive processes.     

Group‐based evaluations for pupil‐on‐teacher violence: The impact of teacher intervention strategy

Although extreme violence to teachers is rare, the fact remains that in the UK, 29% of teachers report having been physically assaulted by a pupil (ATL, 2008a ). The ways in which responsibility for such assaults are attributed can have legal, educational and managerial implications. In the current study, teachers (N = 66), pupils (N = 68) and parents (N = 64) from a large secondary school in the UK read an incident report form outlining an incident depicting a pupil physically assaulting a teacher. The incident report was manipulated such that, prior to being assaulted, the teacher had either separated the assailant pupil from another pupil using a physical or non‐physical intervention. Results revealed that participating parents' and teachers' evaluations of the assailant's parents and the teacher differed from those of pupils in several ways. The results are discussed in terms of group‐based responsibility for deviant behaviour and implications for teacher behaviour in response to pupil on teacher violence. Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Effects of Severity of Accident,Intent, and “Alcoholism is a Disease” Excuse on Judgments of a Drunk Driver1

One hundred fifty-five women and 122 men read scenarios of an accident caused by a male drunk driver. The severity of the accident was either high (death) or low (monetary damage). In addition, the driver either expressed or denied intent (he admitted or denied knowing he was drunk before deciding to drive) and the driver either accepted responsibility for the accident or used the excuse that alcoholism is a disease beyond his control. On trait ratings, the driver was evaluated as being more reckless and as feeling greater emotion when the accident was severe. The driver who used the “alcoholism is a disease” excuse was evaluated as being less sincere and more reckless than the driver who accepted responsibility for the accident. On attributional ratings, the driver was rated as deserving greater punishment when the accident was severe. On sanctions, only severity of the accident influenced recommended fines and prison sentences for the driver. This study was consistent with previous research showing that recommended punishment for a drunk driver who caused an accident is primarily a function of accident severity.     

“Be careful what you wish for…”: A quantitative and qualitative investigation of “fata1 attractions”

This study uses questionnaire data from 301 terminated romantic relationships to investigate hypotheses concerning the conditions under which a quality that is initially appealing in a partner is later disliked (i.e., a “fatal attraction”). Individuals are expected to be prone to fatal attractions when they are attracted to a quality in a romantic partner that is “different” in any of three ways: (1) different from the individual's own qualities (i.e., dissimilar); (2) different from average (i.e., extreme, or unique); or (3) different from normative expectations (i.e., gender atypical). Such attractions are less likely, however, when individuals are drawn to similarity in another. Findings from a logistic regression analysis provide support for four of the five hypotheses. Fatal attractions are significantly more likely when an individual is drawn to partner characteristics seen either as “dissimilar” from her or his own, as “unique,” or as “extreme” in nature. When these characteristics are viewed as “similar,” disenchantment is less likely. Fatal attractions are neither more, nor less, probable, however, when partner qualities contradict gender stereotypes. A qualitative analysis of open-ended questionnaire responses provides further support for these attraction patterns. The findings have implications for diverse theories, including those of mate selection and dialectics.     

The relationship between inflated personal responsibility and exaggerated danger expectancies in obsessive-compulsive concerns

The association between responsibility for a negative outcome, perceived severity of the outcome and perceived likelihood of the outcome was examined in a sample of 70 undergraduate students. Participants were asked to rate the likelihood and severity of 10 negative outcomes, five related to contamination and five related to checking. Thirty-eight participants completed a version of the questionnaire that presented the subject as responsible for the action that may lead to a negative outcome ('personally responsible' group). The remaining 32 completed a version of the questionnaire that presented someone else performing the actions that may lead to a negative outcome ('other responsible' group). Significant differences emerged between the personally responsible and other responsible groups for severity of outcome ratings but not for likelihood of outcome ratings. Specifically, for both washing and checking concerns, participants in the personally responsible group rated the severity of the potential negative outcome as greater than did those in the other responsible group. The results support the claimed general tendency for individuals to regard an outcome as more aversive if they are personally responsible for that outcome, rather than someone else being responsible. The results suggest that, in general, increasing perceptions of personal responsibility will increase cost or severity estimates in subjective danger calculations, and that responsibility may influence OCD phenomena in this way. Finally, the results suggest that attempts to manipulate responsibility in the laboratory may be confounded by necessarily impacting on cost estimates, and therefore on danger expectancies.     

The “Islamized Stranger”: On “Chronic” Versus “Contextual” Salience in the Measurement of Anti‐Muslim Prejudice

There is an ongoing debate whether anti‐Muslim prejudice in Western countries is more widespread than prejudice towards other ethno‐cultural groups or general ethnic prejudice. Previous research used different methodologies and yielded contradictory results. In this article, we combine a population‐based split‐sample survey experiment (N = 1,323), where half of the respondents judged items about Muslims and the other half statements about strangers, with an open question probing which groups respondents thought of when thinking about “strangers.” We furthermore extend previous research by not only focusing on general ethnic prejudice, but to differentiate between perceived trustworthiness, economic, cultural, and security threat. Our results strongly support the idea that the difference between the “chronic” and “contextual” salience of the target of prejudice should be taken into account.     

What “Mice Trap” tells us about the mental lexicon

Level ordering has proven inadequate as a morphological theory, leaving unexplained the experimental results taken to support it as a component of innate grammar—young children’s acceptance of irregular plurals in English compounds. The present study demonstrates that these results can be explained by slower access to the grammatically preferred singulars of irregular nouns when compounds are created on-line from plural stimuli. Experiments on English noun–noun compound production and on production of either singular or plural forms from the same or opposite form confirmed that more irregular than regular plurals were used in compounds, and showed that producing irregular singulars from plurals was slower than producing regular singulars. Plural responses were also slower when cue and required response number differed.     

Divergent Perceptions of Jail Inmates and Correctional Officers: The “Blame the Other-Expect to Be Blamed” Effect1

Inmates and correctional officers in a Lwnty jail made attributions of responsibility and predicted each other's attributions in response to four hypothetical stimulus incidents varying in severity of the inmate's intentional misbehavior and the severity of the officer's intentional retribution. When the misbehavior and retribution were moderate, subjects blamed both participants about equally. However, both over- and underreactions to the stimulus inmate's misbehavior elicited defensiveness, with both officers and inmates more likely to attribute responsibility to their opposite role character. In addition, both inmates and officers appeared to respond defensively to severe but equitable retributions. Subjects blamed each other, and, anticipating the other's defensiveness, expected to be blamed. Examination of the data suggested that subjects may have responded stereotypically rather than empathetically, and that defensiveness impeded rather than facilitated predictive accuracy. Results were consistent with previous research, increasing the generality of the “blame the other-expect to be blamed” effect. Additional analyses indicated that inmates were more likely than officers to notice mitigating circumstances when considering the inmates' responsibility. Three recommendations were made which may help to forestall inmate reactivity to retributions: (1) Jail personnel should have objective and clear definitions as to what constitutes major and minor infractions; (2) inmates should be aware of these criteria; and (3) jail personnel should be sensitive to mitigating circumstances and moderate their retribution or anticipate possible reactivity from inmates.     

Procedural fairness, outcome favorability, and judgments of an authority's responsibility

Fairness theory (R. Folger & R. Cropanzano, 1998, 2001) postulates that, particularly in the face of unfavorable outcomes, employees judge an organizational authority to be more responsible for their outcomes when the authority exhibits lower procedural fairness. Three studies lent empirical support to this notion. Furthermore, 2 of the studies showed that attributions of responsibility to the authority mediated the relationship between the authority's procedural fairness and employees' reactions to unfavorable outcomes. The findings (a) provide support for a key assumption of fairness theory, (b) help to account for the pervasive interactive effect of procedural fairness and outcome favorability on employees' attitudes and behaviors, and (c) contribute to an emerging trend in justice research concerned with how people use procedural fairness information to make attributions of responsibility for their outcomes. Practical implications, limitations, and suggestions for future research also are discussed.     

Comment on “The Self‐Care of Psychologists and Mental Health Professionals” (Dattilio, 2015)

Professor Frank Dattilio's article “The Self‐care of Psychologists and Mental Health Professionals” provides an overview of stress and related mental health problems among psychologists, and a proposition that psychologists are not vigilant in regard to self‐care. Dattilio offers a range of self‐care strategies and recommendations, and highlights self‐care practices within various psychology frameworks, and concludes with some “healthy tips” for managing stress. In my commentary I underscore Dattilio's message that self‐care is of critical importance in psychology practice, given the responsibility of caring for others inherent in the work psychologists undertake. However, I raise additional points of consideration and suggest an alternative approach to addressing the self‐care needs of the profession. My commentary makes the following points: (a) the need to distinguish between psychology trainees and practising qualified psychologists when addressing stress and self‐care requirements in the profession; (b) the importance of developing a culture of self‐care among psychologists by providing self‐care instruction during training; (c) the need to temper research findings on stress and mental health among psychologists by the methodological weakness of the studies in this area; (d) adhering to the recent call from colleagues to shift from a focus on pathology and punishment to a positive acceptance, mindfulness, and values‐based approach for encouraging self‐care among psychologists; (e) the use of a systematic framework for organising the presentation of self‐care strategies that makes them more accessible; and (f) an appeal to professional bodies to take their responsibility in promoting self‐care in the profession.     

An assessment of the potential utility of “scientific jury selection”: A “thought experiment” approach

The efficacy of “scientific jury selection” (the use of social science methodology to aid the jury selection process) has been a subject of considerable contention. Unfortunately, such issues are difficult to address empirically, especially at the level of jury rather than juror decisions. One means of addressing some of these questions is through the use of “thought experiments” or computer simulations that are based not on intuition or conventional wisdom alone but guided by relevant empirical data. This paper reports the outcomes of simulations that explore jury verdict consequences from the use of scientific jury selection to (a) obtain changes in venue, (b) select jurors, and (c) accomplish both of the preceding. The results indicated that the potential effects of scientific jury selection are strongest when the techniques are successful in bringing about changes of venue or more representative jury panels. Somewhat weaker, albeit still consequential, effects were observed in those instances where scientific jury selection techniques are used to select particular jurors. The psychological and legal implications of these results, and the thought experiment approach in general, are discussed.     

A study of the comparative structure of guilt and shame in a Chinese society.

On the basis of previous theoretical and empirical analyses of the comparative structures of guilt and shame, the authors hypothesized that antecedent condition (personal inadequacy vs. moral norm violation), audience presence, and personal responsibility attribution would distinguish shame from guilt. Although the subject population was Hong Kong Chinese, evidence from previous studies suggests that the comparative structures of guilt and shame are quite similar across cultures. The subjects were asked to recall either a guilt or a shame incident, and their responses were then coded into the predictor variables. The results of the study indicated that guilt was most likely to emerge when individuals had violated a moral norm and held themselves responsible for their conduct. In contrast, shame emerged more frequently when subjects felt personally inadequate than when they had violated moral norms. Moreover, when a guilt incident was reported, and audience was rarely mentioned, whereas subjects who reported a shame incident would generally feel personally responsible and often mentioned being looked at or evaluated. However, neither personal responsibility nor the presence of an audience seemed to be essential for a person to experience shame.     

The Role of Police Perceptions and Practices in the Development of “Public Disorder”1,2

Recent studies suggest that crowd conflict needs to be understood as an interaction between the crowd and out‐groups such as the police. This paper describes a questionnaire survey in which 80 police officers from 2 United Kingdom forces were asked about their perceptions of crowds, appropriate “public order” policing methods, and attributions of responsibility for crowd conflict. As predicted, police officers saw the composition of crowds as mixed; yet they also constructed a dichotomy between a powerful minority, capable of exerting influence in the service of disorder, and a majority, who are unable to resist this influence. Police officers did not clearly endorse the view that crowds pose a homogeneous threat. They recommended control and quick intervention to prevent the escalation of crowd violence but denied that such methods might themselves contribute to conflict. Path analysis provides suggestive evidence that these perceptions of the crowd are related as part of a coherent ideology. Overall, these results offer support for the elaborated social identity model of crowd behavior as a dynamic intergroup process.     

Perceived social support and maternal adaptation during the transition from hospital to home care of high-risk infants

Forty-two mothers of high-risk infants who had been hospitalized in a newborn intensive care unit were interviewed approximately 2 months after hospital discharge. On standard questionnaires, they reported how much support they had received since discharge and their need for and satisfaction with support in three areas: Emotional, informational, and tangible support. Mothers also completed the Profile of Mood States, the Sleep, Feeding, and Crying Questionnaire, and the Impact of Event Scale and rated the severity of the infant's medical condition and expected developmental/health outcome. Measures of maternal adaptation and infant characteristics were subjected to exploratory factor analysis from which summary scores were constructed. One maternal adaptation factor and two infant status factors were examined in relation to social support variables, but no significant associations were found for the sample as a whole. However, satisfaction with each area of support was related to maternal adaptation when the infant's post-discharge status was relatively more severe. The results are discussed in terms of the crises of the hospital to home transition and the difficult tasks that face parents after the assumption of full responsibility for a vulnerable infant who required newborn intensive care.     

The Perception of Honour-Related Violence in Female and Male University Students from Morocco,Cameroon and Italy

The study investigates the perception of honour-related violence against women in female and male university students from three countries - Morocco, Cameroon, Italy – all considered honour cultures but different in terms of various other sociocultural factors, such as family structure and gender roles. One hundred fourteen Moroccan (47 females, 67 males), 106 Cameroonian (41 females, 65 males) and 103 Italian (51 females, 52 males) students attending Turin University and currently living in Turin, answered a questionnaire to evaluate an act of honour-related violence by a father against his daughter. The results showed that the perception of this act was influenced by the participants’ nationality: Italians evaluated the incident as more serious and more as a crime than Moroccans, and the latter more than Cameroonians. Furthermore, Italians attributed less responsibility to the victim and more responsibility to the assailant than Moroccans and Cameroonians did; accordingly, they also proposed more severe punishment for the assailant than Moroccans and Cameroonians. The results also showed an interaction between nationality and gender: Cameroonian women attributed more responsibility to the victim and less to the assailant than Cameroonian men, and Italian men attributed less responsibility to the assailant than Italian women. These results are interpreted in terms of the importance attributed to family honour in the three countries and their differences in social organisation and gender roles.     

Judging deservingness and affect in relation to another's employment or unemployment: a test of a justice model

In a study that was based on a structural model of deservingness, 24 male and 80 female undergraduate students responded to scenarios in which either a liked or disliked unemployed stimulus person expended either high or low effort and then either obtained employment or remained unemployed. Results showed that, when the outcome was employment, judgements of responsibility, deservingness, and pleasure about the successful outcome were higher when the stimulus person expended high effort rather than low effort. When the outcome was unemployment, judgements of responsibility, deservingness, and reported pleasure about the unsuccessful outcome were higher when the stimulus person displayed low effort rather than high effort in seeking a job and participants reported feeling less sympathetic and more annoyed with the stimulus person and less inclined to provide financial assistance. Liking relations had most effects in the employed condition. The employed outcome elicited more reported pleasure and less resentment for the liked stimulus person and he or she was judged to be more responsible for and more deserving of employment than the disliked stimulus person. The results were discussed in relation to component balanced and unbalanced structures within the structural model and they also suggested some elaboration of the responsibility variable. © 1998 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.