How Effective are Different Accounts of Harm-doing in Softening Victims’ Reactions? A Scenario Investigation of the Effects of Severity,Relationship, and Culture

In order to examine the effects of different types of accounts in terms of the victims' reactions, we presented 193 American and 186 Japanese participants with scenarios in which an actor unintentionally harmed someone and then gave one of five different accounts. We asked the participants to estimate how the victim would react (emotional alleviation, impression improvement, or forgiveness) to these accounts. The participants rated that the victims would make more positive reactions to the mitigative accounts (apology or excuse) but more negative reactions to the assertive accounts (the denial). Although the reactions to accounts became generally more negative when the harm was severe, the mitigative accounts were more likely to be accepted by the victim than the assertive ones. As compared with the Japanese, the Americans rated the victim as more increasing their impression improvement reactions to one type of justification but more decreasing it to the denial. However, these results did not match the cultural preference of accounts, thereby casting doubt over the validity of cultural efficacy theory.     

Gender-related effects in the perception of anger expression

The purpose of the study was to investigate the influence of sex of stimulus person, sex type of subject, and sex of subject on the social perception of anger expression. One hundred and sixty-six female and 100 male subjects completed a questionnaire that consisted of 10 vignettes depicting the expression of anger by either a female or a male stimulus person. For each vignette, subjects rated the psychological balance, expected frequency of behavior, perceived degree of anger, and appropriateness of behavior. Overall, female stimulus persons were rated higher on all dependent measures, but only male raters significantly differentiated between male and female stimulus persons. Generally, female subjects gave higher ratings, but viewed angry behavior as less appropriate than did male subjects. Ratings were also found to be related to subjects' scores on Extended Personal Attributes Questionnaire scales that involved socially undesirable traits. Post hoc analysis indicated that the type of anger response (“aggressive” or “nonaggressive”) was also an important variable, especially for the female subjects.     

Effects of Considering Who and Why the Defendant Attacked1

Some people who are accused of a crime admit to the act, but provide an excuse. The effects of an excuse's self‐inflictedness level (high, moderate, or low) and the type of victim attacked (one partially responsible for the defendant's excusing condition, or innocent victim) were investigated. After a pretest (N= 26) to choose stimuli, participants (N= 220) read a scenario in which a male attacks another and then, once on trial, gives an excuse for his act. Those giving highly vs. less self‐inflicted excuses were more likely to receive a guilty verdict, received higher guilt level ratings, and tended to receive longer sentences; those who hurt an innocent vs. a partially responsible victim were more likely to be found guilty. In addition, the defendant's sentence was influenced by both the type of victim and the self‐inflictedness level of the excuse. The influence of perceived responsibility for an act on jurors' decisions is discussed     

The Impact of Defendant Gender and Relationship to Victim on Juror Decisions in a Child Sexual Abuse Case

We examined the impact of defendant gender and relationship to victim on verdict decisions and ratings of witness believability in a case of alleged child sexual assault. Mock jurors ( N  = 256) read 1 of 4 extensive case summaries. The cases varied the gender of the defendant and his or her relationship to the child (parent or stranger). Data revealed that participants were significantly more likely to find male defendants (especially the father) guilty than female defendants. Female jurors rated the victim as more believable and the defendant as less believable than did male jurors. All mock jurors rated the victim as more believable if the defendant was male, and they saw the female defendants as more believable than the male defendants.     

Situational and Individual Influences on Judgments of Hostile Environment Sexual Harassment1

The current research examines the judgment processes of third-party evaluators of sexual harassment situations. Four situational variables were hypothesized to influence ratings of situation appropriateness and judgments of sexual harassment. The evaluator's gender and personality also were hypothesized to influence both ratings. Participants were 73 male and 51 female undergraduate students. Results indicated that behavior severity and victim response significantly influenced ratings. The frequency of the behavior influenced appropriateness ratings, but interacted with behavior severity for harassment judgments. The effects of the gender of the evaluator were mediated by the evaluator's level of tolerance for harassment. The effects of the power relationship and rater personality were not significant.     

Justice motive effects in ageism: The effects of a victim's age on observer perceptions of injustice and punishment judgments

Drawing on just-world theory and research showing that older persons are generally assigned a devalued status in society, we examined the impact of an innocent victim's age on observer perceptions of injustice and punishment reactions. In three experiments, we demonstrated that observers perceived the suffering of an older (vs. younger) person as less unfair, which, in turn, reduced their willingness to punish the harm doer. In Study 1, participants rated a car accident as less unfair and consequently punished the harm doer less when the victim was older. In Study 2, participants recommended punishing a harm doer less when the victim was older (vs. younger) when the need to believe in a just world was threatened (i.e., only when the victim was innocent). In Study 3, only participants higher in ageism perceived the suffering of an older (vs. younger) victim as less unfair and, consequently, recommended less punishment for the harm doer.     

Preference‐expectation reversal in the ratings of independent and interdependent individuals: A USA–Japan comparison

We predicted and supported the prediction that a ‘preference‐expectation reversal’ would occur among Japanese but not among Americans. American and Japanese participants evaluated ideal‐typical independent and interdependent persons on the negative–positive dimension, and estimated how others would evaluate these persons. They also indicated their preference for acting like each of the target persons; that is, which of the two target persons they would prefer to act like. Both the American and Japanese participants wanted to act like the typical independent person rather than the typical interdependent person. However, the Japanese participants expected that others would evaluate the interdependent person more positively than the independent person. This preference‐expectation reversal was not observed among the American participants. Further analysis demonstrated that the American participants' personal evaluations of the two targets were consistent with their preferences. The Japanese participants' personal evaluation represented a compromise between their preferences and the expected responses of others. These results suggest that the culturally shared belief in Japan that interdependent persons would receive more positive evaluations than independent persons created an incentive for them to behave interdependently despite their preferences.     

Cross‐national examination of the perpetrator–victim account estimation bias as a function of different types of accounts

In two cross‐national studies, we investigated the existence of a perpetrator–victim account estimation bias and how this bias can be reduced or eliminated when estimating the perpetrator's use of a mixed account; that is, an account in which the perpetrator not only apologizes but also explains mitigating and justifiable circumstances. Japanese and American participants took either the perspective of the perpetrator or the victim and estimated the likelihood of the perpetrator's use of each account. The results supported our hypothesis in both national samples. The implications of the bias and the role of the mixed account in reducing it are discussed.     

The cost of forgiveness: Observers prefer victims who leave unfaithful romantic partners

Ninety‐six male fraternity members (Study 1), 112 female voters (Study 2), and 219 undergraduates (Study 3) read scenarios in which a group representative forgave, retaliated, or left a romantic partner after the partner's sexual infidelity was publically revealed. Observers rated a victim who forgave his or her partner to be as mature as a victim who ended the relationship, but also as weaker and less competent. They rated a victim who forgave to be more mature but almost as weak and incompetent as a victim who retaliated. Symbolic concerns that the victim's behavior violated shared values (all three studies) or damaged the group's power/status (Study 3) mediated the relationship between victim behavior and victim ratings. These data demonstrate how the symbolic concerns that shape observers' judgments of an offender can extend to observers' judgments of the victim. Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Interviewers’ Moods and Evaluations of Job Applicants: The Role of Applicant Qualifications1

Participants were induced to experience positive affect, negative affect, or no shift in current affect. Then they conducted a simulated job interview with an applicant (actually an assistant) who appeared to be highly qualified, ambiguously qualified, or unqualified for the job in question. It was predicted that interviewers’ moods would exert the strongest influence on ratings of the applicant when this person's qualifications were ambiguous. Results offered partial support for this hypothesis. When the applicant's qualifications were ambiguous, participants induced to experience positive affect rated this person higher on several dimensions than participants induced to experience negative affect. When the applicant appeared to be highly qualified for the job, in contrast, interviewers’ moods had no significant effect on their ratings of this person. Contrary to expectations, however, interviewers’ moods significantly influenced ratings of the applicant when this person appeared to be unqualified for the job in question. In this condition, participants induced to experience positive affect actually rated the applicant lower than those induced to experience negative affect. Several mechanisms that may have contributed to these results (e. g., tendencies toward mood maintenance, adoption of a positive-test strategy) are examined. In addition, practical implications of these findings for conducting job interviews and for the use of various impression-management techniques by applicants are discussed.     

Effects of gender and situation on the perception of sexual harassment

This study addressed three sources of variability in the perception of sexual harassment: the gender of the observer, the gender combination of the harasser and victim, and the role relationship between the harasser and victim. College students (N = 197), approximately 80% of whom were Caucasian, single, and in their early 20s, were randomly divided into two groups. In one group, the harasser was a man and the victim was a woman. In the other group, the harasser was a woman and the victim was a man. Participants rated the degree to which they thought sexual harassment occurred in 20 hypothetical interactions in each of three situations using a 7-point sexual harassment scale. Men and women rated the situations alike as long as the harasser was a man and the victim was a woman. When the perpetrator was a woman and the victim was a man, men gave significantly lower ratings than women. In contrast, women's ratings were the same regardless of the gender of the harasser. Harassment ratings also varied as a function of the power differential between the harasser and victim. The more egalitarian the relationship, the less likely participants were to perceive the behavior as sexually harassing.     

A comparison of stimulus ratings made online and in person: Gender and method effects

In Experiment 1, separate samples rated nouns on danger, using either an online survey or the same survey in person. In Experiment 2, a single sample rated words on familiarity, using both methods. Women’s in-person and online ratings correlated significantly better than men’s. In-person ratings correlated significantly better with existing norms in 4 of 8 instances. There were significant effects of condition on mean ratings and completion times. Ratings from participants who withdrew from the experiment correlated significantly less well with existing norms than did ratings from those who completed the whole experiment, in 12 of 16 instances. Analysis of existing data showed that a different statistical conclusion is reached depending on whether in-person or online ratings are used. Furthermore, the categorization of 17.9% (Experiment 1) and 5.3% (Experiment 2) of the items as high or low depends on which ratings are used. Ratings gathered in person and online cannot be freely substituted.     

Effects of Victim,Defendant, and Juror Gender on Decisions in Child Sexual Assault Cases1

We examined the combined influence of juror, victim, and defendant gender on jurors’ decisions in child sexual abuse cases. Mock jurors read scenarios of an assault case involving a man or woman defendant accused of molesting a 15‐year‐old boy or girl. Jurors then rendered verdicts and rated the defendant's and victim's believability and responsibility for the abuse. Female jurors were generally more pro‐victim in case judgments than were male jurors. Additionally, a woman perpetrator was evaluated more leniently than was a man perpetrator, especially by male jurors when the victim was a boy. Case judgments were unrelated to jurors’ social conservatism, sexism, or attitudes toward homosexuality. Results have implications for understanding social perceptions of mixed‐ and same‐gender abuse involving adolescent victims, and juror decision making in man‐ and woman‐perpetrated child sexual assault cases.     

The role of context and functionality in the interpretation of quantifiers

The aim of the three experiments that are reported was to investigate the role of context, especially size and functionality, in the interpretation of quantifiers. The studies all used a task in which participants rated the appropriateness of quantifiers describing the number of balls in a bowl. The size of the balls was found to have an effect: Identical numbers of balls were given different ratings depending on ball size. It was also found that quantifiers were rated as more appropriate when the balls were in their natural functional relationship with the bowl (i.e., contained within the bowl), than when the functional relationship was breached (i.e., the balls overflowed the bowl). Tilting the bowl had surprising effects in that it led to some quantifiers being rated as more appropriate. The results are interpreted as indicating that quantifiers carry little specific meaning in themselves but instead derive their meaning from the context in which they occur.     

Support Person Presence and Child Victim Testimony: Believe it or Not

This study examined the effects of support person presence on participants’ perceptions of an alleged child sexual abuse victim and defendant. Two hundred jury-eligible community members (n = 100 males) viewed a DVD of an 11-year-old girl's simulated courtroom testimony either with or without a female support person seated next to her. Participants found the child victim to be less accurate and trustworthy, and the defendant to be less guilty and less likely to have sexually abused children, when the support person was present. Participants who viewed the female support person (n = 100) believed that she had probably coached and spent a great deal of time with the child victim before testifying. Female participants perceived the child to be more accurate, and the defendant to be more guilty and likely to have sexually abused children, than male participants. The degree to which the child victim's testimonial behavior violated participants’ expectancies mediated the negative relation between support person presence and child victim accuracy and trustworthiness. Support person presence was positively associated with expectancy violation, which in turn was negatively associated with child victim accuracy and trustworthiness. These preliminary findings suggest that seating a support person next to an alleged child victim in court may have the unintended effect of decreasing the child's perceived credibility and, if replicated, suggest that alternative seating arrangements might be necessary. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Different emotional lives

Cultural differences in daily emotions were investigated by administering emotion questionnaires four times a day throughout a one-week period. Respondents were American students, Japanese students living in the United States, and Japanese students living in Japan. Americans rated their emotional lives as more pleasant than did the Japanese groups. The dimension of emotional pleasantness (unpleasant-pleasant) was predicted better by interdependent than independent concerns in the Japanese groups, but this was not the case in the American group where the variance predicted by interdependent and independent concerns did not significantly differ. It is argued that cultural differences in the concerns most strongly associated with pleasantness are related to differences in ideals, norms, and practices of what it means to be a person. Cultural differences in the concerns are assumed to implicate differences in the nature of emotional experience.     

Attitudes Toward Sexual Harassment of Women in India1

A hypothetical incident of sexual harassment at the workplace was presented to 720 undergraduate students of the University of Bombay who attributed blame to the female victim of a superordinate male harasser and rated the appropriateness of her response to the harassment. The experiment had a 2 (Subject's Sex) × 3 (Victim's Marital Status: unmarried, married, or divorced) × 2 (Type of Harassment: verbal vs. physical) × 4 (Victim's Response: ignoring, complaining, scolding, or slapping) between-subjects factorial design with 15 subjects per cell. Male subjects blamed the victim of harassment more than female subjects, the unmarried and married victims were blamed more than the divorced victim, and the ignoring victim was blamed more than the complaining, scolding, and slapping victims. Perceived appropriateness of victim's response was higher with the divorced victim as compared to the unmarried and married victims, with physical harassment as compared to verbal harassment, and with the complaining, scolding, and slapping victims as compared to the ignoring victim. A three-way interaction on perceived appropriateness suggested that female subjects, as compared to male subjects, were more in favor of strong self-assertive action against harassment, but relatively less so in the case of the unmarried victim.     

Depictions of acne and psoriasis influence interpersonal aversion

The presence of a dermatological condition may deter contact with the affected person because it falsely signals the threat of infection. The current study investigated interpersonal aversion towards individuals with the appearance of acne and psoriasis. Participants (N = 196) either viewed a female face with the appearance of acne, psoriasis, or no visible dermatological condition. Participants rated the attractiveness of the person, and indicated their willingness for social and indirect contact with them. The person depicted with acne was rated significantly less attractive than the person with psoriasis or no dermatological condition. Participants reported significantly less willingness for indirect contact with the person depicted with acne or psoriasis compared to the person with no visible dermatological condition. In contrast, participants expressed more willingness for social contact with a person with acne than with the person with psoriasis or no dermatological condition. Group differences were significant when controlling for attractiveness ratings. Unwarranted fear of infection might underpin avoidance and discriminatory behaviour towards those with skin conditions. Further research is required to understand factors that influence avoidance of contact.