Is Negligence a First Cousin to Intentionality? Lay Conceptions of Negligence and Its Relationship to Intentionality

In three studies, we examined lay conceptions of negligence and how they are used when making judgments about actors' intentions, negligence, and blame. Study 1 examined the extent to which participants agreed about what constitutes negligence and accidents. After finding a high level of agreement between participants, Study 2 explored the features that defined participants' folk understanding of negligence. Additionally, we examined if definitions of negligence overlapped with key features of definitions of intentionality proposed in the literature. Study 2 suggested there were some key overlapping features and differences between negligence and intentionality. Finally, Study 3 examined how two key features of intentionality and negligence (knowledge and awareness) were related to attributions of negligence, accidental causation, blame, and desire to punish. The findings suggested that knowledge and awareness are positively related to judgments of negligence, blame, and desire to punish. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Culpable control and counterfactual reasoning in the psychology of blame

Many counterfactual reasoning studies assess how people ascribe blame for harmful actions. By itself, the knowledge that a harmful outcome could easily have been avoided does not predict blame. In three studies, the authors showed that an outcome's mutability influences blame and related judgments when it is coupled with a basis for negative evaluations. Study 1 showed that mutability influenced blame and compensation judgments when a physician was negligent but not when the physician took reasonable precautions to prevent harm. Study 2 showed that this finding was attenuated when the victim contributed to his own demise. In Study 3, whether an actor just missed arriving on time to see his dying mother or had no chance to see her influenced his blameworthiness when his reason for being late provided a basis for negative evaluations but made no difference when there was a positive reason for the delay. These findings clarify the conditions under which an outcome's mutability is likely to influence blame and related attributions.     

Self-behavior focus of attention as a determinant of children's and adults' attributions to stories with negative outcomes

This study explored characteristics of attributions made to negative outcome stories by fourth-, sixth-, and eighth-graders as well as college students. All subjects read six stories representing three stories for each of two levels (self-focus and behavior-focus) of a within-subjects factor, Focus of Attention. Dependent measures included both spontaneous attributions and structured evaluations on the dimensions of causality, responsibility, blame, and deservingness. Analyses of the spontaneous attributions indicated that Self attributions were more frequently given than either Behavior or External attributions to both self- and behavior-focus stories. The experimental manipulation of internal focus produced matching attributions only in the self manipulation. Analyses of the structured evaluations indicated that subjects used Cause and Responsibility interchangeably but only eighth-graders and college students differentiated Cause/Responsibility from both Blame and Deservingness. Cause/Responsibility was also shown to have more salience in the behavior-than self-focus stories. It is suggested that a verbal focus on behavior has limited effects in producing defensive, self-distanced attributions but may heighten evaluations of Cause/Responsibility. In addition, behavior-focus seems to have little effect on the development of the psychologically more complex evaluations of blame and deservingness.     

The belief in a just world and immanent justice reasoning in adults

Deciding that negative experiences are punishment for prior misdeeds, even when plausible causal links are missing, is immanent justice (IJ) reasoning (Piaget, 1932/1965). Three studies examined a just world theory analysis of IJ reasoning in adults (Lerner, 1980). Studies 1 and 2 varied the valence of a target person's behavior prior to them experiencing an unrelated negative (car accident, Study 1) or positive (lottery win, Study 2) outcome. Participants viewed the outcomes as the result of prior behavior most when they fit deservingness expectations (good person won the lottery, bad person injured in automobile accident), suggesting that just world concerns influenced IJ reasoning. The lottery-winning finding (Study 2) also extends IJ reasoning to positive experiences. A third study found that a manipulation of just world threat in one context (prolonged or ended suffering of an HIV victim) influenced IJ responses in a subsequent unrelated context (automobile accident scenario).     

For Whom is this World Just?: Sexual Orientation and AIDS

The "just world" hypothesis has been used to explain victim blaming, or the attributions that people have for why a person has been victimized. Based on some of the premises of the just world hypothesis it was predicted that people would be more likely to attribute blame to a gay man with AIDS than they would to a heterosexual man with AIDS. From a sample of 79 undergraduate students it was found that a gay man was given more personal blame for contracting AIDS than a heterosexual man. Furthermore, the more intolerant people were towards gay men and the more fearful they were of contact with AIDS, the more likely they were to blame the gay man for contracting AIDS. Although preliminary, these results indicate the usefulness of the just world hypothesis for understanding the stigmatization of people with AIDS.     

Reactions to Patients' Self-or Chance-Blaming Attributions for Illnesses Having Varying Life-style Involvement

The effects of the perceived accuracy of attributions of self blame and chance blame were examined in the context of health care. Health practitioners ( N = 147) rated interviews in which patients made self-or chance-blaming attributions for diseases with high (heart attack, stroke), or low (cancer, arthritis) life-style involvement, or acidental injuries. Three discriminant analyses yielded p < .001. Self-blaming heart and stroke patients were rated as coping better and acting more appropriately and typically than chance blamers. Other self blamers were rated as more depressed, poorly adjusted, coping poorly, not accepting disability, needing counselling and information. Additionally, self-blaming accident victims were judged as more dependent, less likeable, and having poorer prognoses than chance blamers. Realistic self blame for life-style diseases did not lead to victimization, but other self-blaming patients were stigmatized and the adaptiveness of self blame as a coping strategy was unrecognized.     

Terror management and attributions of blame to innocent victims: reconciling compassionate and defensive responses

In this article, 4 studies test the hypothesis that reminders of personal death bias the normative attribution process and increase the motivation to blame severely injured, innocent victims. In Studies 1 and 2, primes of death led to greater attributions of blame to severely injured victims but did not significantly influence attributions of blame to either mildly injured victims or negatively portrayed others. In Study 3, primes of death led to greater attributions of blame to victims of circumstance but did not influence attributions of blame to victims who were explicitly responsible for their condition. In Study 4, innocent victims who were severely injured elicited more death-related cognitions than did victims who were responsible for their condition or who were only mildly injured. These findings indicate that the predictions of normative models of attribution may be moderated, and even overturned, when observers are reminded of their personal death such that defensive needs override rational inferential processes.     

Taking control of violence against doctors

Violence against healthcare professionals is a serious but understudied global problem and one that lacks evidence-based solutions. The current research offers a novel explanation and intervention for addressing this issue: We propose that low feelings of control among patients and their family members play an important role in shaping doctor-patient relationships. To regain a sense of control, we suggest that patients attribute responsibility to doctors for their suffering, which may in turn lead to aggressive behavioural intentions against one's doctors. We conducted three studies to understand whether individuals with low perceived control blame doctors more, and whether threats to their sense of control cause participants to attribute more responsibility to doctors. Study 1 found that feelings of lack of control were an important predictor of attributing responsibility for negative illness-related incidents to doctors in a manner consistent with blame. Study 2 specified that the chaotic and unpredictable nature of illness, and not just its negative valence, is what drives attributions of increased responsibility to doctors. Study 3, which utilized a field setting in hospitals, found that an experimental intervention to increase feelings of control decreased frustration against (Study 3a/3b) and intention to harm doctors (Study 3b). These findings suggest that increasing feelings of control among patients can improve patient-doctor relationships. We also discuss the role of control and scapegoating during the COVID-19 pandemic.     

Intergroup helping during the coronavirus crisis: Effects of group identification,ingroup blame and third party outgroup blame

Two studies tested predictors of helping across national boundaries. British participants reported blame attributions for the coronavirus crisis, either to the British government (ingroup blame), or to the Chinese government (third party outgroup blame), and it was tested whether this was associated with intentions to donate money to help outgroup members suffering from effects of the coronavirus crisis in the world's poorer countries. It was hypothesized that strength of identification with the national ingroup would be negatively associated with blame attributions to the ingroup, and that it would be positively associated with blame attributions to a third party outgroup. Blame attributions were predicted in turn to be related to outgroup helping, with ingroup blame being positively associated with helping intentions, and third party outgroup blame being negatively associated with helping intentions. Support for these predictions were found in one exploratory (N = 100) and one confirmatory (N = 250) study.     

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.     

Beyond personal responsibility: Effects of causal attributions for overweight and obesity on weight-related beliefs,stigma, and policy support

Objective: The objective of this research was to compare the effects of different causal attributions for overweight and obesity, among individuals with overweight and obesity, on weight-related beliefs, stigmatising attitudes and policy support.

Design: In Study 1, an online sample of 95 US adults rated the extent to which they believed various factors caused their own weight status. In Study 2, 125 US adults read one of three randomly assigned online passages attributing obesity to personal responsibility, biology, or the ‘food environment.’ All participants in both studies were overweight or obese.

Main outcome measures: All participants reported beliefs about weight loss, weight-stigmatising attitudes, and support for obesity-related policies.

Results: In Study 1, biological attributions were associated with low weight-malleability beliefs and blame, high policy support, but high internalised weight bias. ‘Food environment’ attributions were not associated with any outcomes, while ‘personal responsibility’ attributions were associated with high prejudice and blame. In Study 2, participants who received information about the food environment reported greater support for food-related policies and greater self-efficacy to lose weight.

Conclusion: Emphasising the role of the food environment in causing obesity may promote food policy support and health behaviours without imposing the negative consequences associated with other attributions.     

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.     

Who Is to Blame? Children's and Adults' Moral Judgments Regarding Victim and Transgressor Negligence

Research has documented that individuals consider outcomes, intentions, and transgressor negligence when making morally relevant judgments (Nobes, Panagiotaki, & Engelhardt, 2017). However, less is known about whether individuals attend to both victim and transgressor negligence in their evaluations. The current study measured 3- to 6-year-olds (N = 70), 7- to 12-year-olds (N = 54), and adults' (N = 97, ages 18–25 years) moral judgments about scenarios in which an accidental transgression occurred involving property damage or physical harm. Participants were either assigned to conditions where the victim or the transgressor was negligent. Results revealed attention to negligence among all participants across a range of different moral judgment measures (including acceptability judgments, punishment judgments, and attributions of blame), with age-related increases in attention to negligence evident. Results provide novel evidence that children and adults consider not just outcomes and intentions, but also the role of negligence in both victims and transgressors, when making social decisions.     

Blaming Drunk Victims: Is It Just World or Sex Role Violation?

Richardson and Campbell (1980, 1982), in studying attributions of blame and responsibility for violent interactions, found that intoxicated victims were blamed more and held more responsible for their victimization than their sober counterparts. Two alternative explanations were proposed to account for this finding: the just world hypothesis and the effects of sex role violation. The present study was designed to test these explanations. One hundred twenty-nine males and 93 females read scenarios that varied the sex of the victim and the level of intoxication of the victim and the aggressor. Participants rated the responsibility of the aggressor, victim, and situation for the action and evaluated the aggressor and victim. Although strong support for neither of the hypotheses was demonstrated, more support was found for the effect of sex role violation than for the just world hypothesis.     

Less thought, more punishment: need for cognition predicts support for punitive responses to crime

Three studies examined the relationship between need for cognition and support for punitive responses to crime. The results of Study 1 (N = 110) indicated that individuals high in need for cognition were less supportive of punitive measures than their low need for cognition counterparts. This finding was replicated in Study 2 (N = 1,807), which employed a nationally representative probability sample and included a more extensive battery of control variables. The purpose of Study 3 (N = 255) was to identify a third variable that might explain this relationship. This final study's results suggest that attributional complexity mediates the relationship between need for cognition and punitiveness. High need for cognition individuals are less supportive of punitive measures because they endorse more complex attributions for human behavior than their low need for cognition peers.     

Twelve‐Step Groups,Attributions of Blame for Personal Sadness,Psychological Well‐Being,and the Moderating Role of Gender1

Two studies investigated links among 12‐step group participation, gender, attributions of blame for personal sadness, and psychological well‐being. Study I used a correlational design to examine these links cross‐sectionally among substance abusers who identified alcohol as their primary drug problem. Study 2 used an experimental design to examine prospective links among these variables for substance abusers who were also adult children of alcoholics. Females engaged in more blame than did males, and personal blame was negatively related to psychological well‐being in Studies 1 and 2. Most significantly, 12‐step group participation was associated with lower personal blame among females but not among males across both studies. These results indicate that 12‐step groups can reduce personal blame among females who have substance abuse problems.     

Evaluating Decision Makers: The Role of Choice Congruence and Outcome

Two studies were conducted in which decision makers were evaluated by subjects who had agreed or disagreed with the decision maker's choice. Subjects read one of two vignettes describing the alternatives available to the decision maker, indicated which alternative they personally favored, and then learned about the decision maker's choice and the outcome that occurred. Study 1 varied whether the outcomes of the decision maker's choice were positive or negative, and whether the subject's preferred option matched (congruent choice) or did not match (incongruent choice) that of the decision maker. Subjects rated the extent to which they thought the decision maker was worthy of praise (in the case of positive outcomes) or blame (in the case of negative outcomes), and the decision maker's likableness and competence. Results revealed a strong effect of congruence on attributions of praise and blame: More praise was ascribed to an agreeing decision maker and more blame to a disagreeing decision maker. The degree to which the decision maker was seen as likable was affected by congruence only, whereas perceived competence was influenced by both outcome and congruence. Study 2 addresses some methodological issues that were unresolved in Study 1 and replicated the results of the first study, using new stimulus materials and an expanded set of dependent measures.     

Depression and Self-Esteem in Boys with Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder: Associations with Comorbid Aggression and Explanatory Attributional Mechanisms

It was tested whether boys with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), subgrouped by aggressive status, would show higher rates of depressive symptomatology and lower levels of self-esteem than would comparison boys and, in a subsample, explored attributional mechanisms that may be related to such internalizing features. Study 1 utilized 114 boys with ADHD (all prior recipients of stimulant medication) and 87 comparison boys, aged 7–12 years. Aggressive boys with ADHD reported more symptoms of depression than did nonaggressive boys with ADHD, who, in turn, reported more depression than did comparison boys. Effect sizes were moderate to large and did not vary with a depression rating scale uncontaminated by ADHD-related items. For self-esteem, the most pronounced effect was that aggressive boys with ADHD showed lower levels than did nonaggressive ADHD or comparison boys; effects were again moderate to large. Study 2 participants were a subsample of boys with ADHD from Study 1 (N = 27). We probed causal attributions in ADHD-related domains through responses to hypothetical vignettes, in which the protagonist's medication status (medicated, not medicated) was crossed with type of outcome (good, bad). Medication-related attributions were frequent. In describing the protagonist's success in relation to medication treatment, the sample showed significant associations between (a) medication-related attributions and (b) increased depressive symptomatology as well as decreased self-esteem. We discuss attributional processes that may help to explain the variation in internalizing symptoms among children with ADHD.     

Conservatism and Perceptions of Poverty: An Attributional Analysis1

Attribution theory was used to relate causal explanations for poverty to affect and behavioral intentions. In Experiment 1, student subjects rated 13 causes of poverty on importance, the attribution of controllability, blame, affects of pity and anger, and judgments of help-giving (personal help and welfare). Two individual differences, conservatism and the belief in a just world, were also assessed. A principal components analysis categorized the causes into three types: individualistic, societal, and fatalistic. Conservatism correlated positively with a belief in the importance of individualistic causes, controllability, blame, and anger, and it correlated negatively with perceptions of the importance of societal causes, pity, and intentions to help. No systematic effects of the belief in a just world emerged. A structural equation analysis revealed that personal help is emotionally determined, whereas welfare judgments are directly related to attributions of responsibility and political ideology. Experiment 2 revealed a similar pattern of results using a nonstudent sample.