Account Strategies for the Violation of Social Norms: Integration and Extension of Sociological and Social Psychological Typologies

Abstract

Account giving is regarded as both a determinant of normcontradictive behaviour and a means of coping with the social and individual side effects of normviolation. Based on the taxonomy proposed by Scott & Lyman (1968), Schonbach (1980) argues that there are four major account giving strategies, namely refusals, justifications, excuses and concessions. This typology is criticized here, both with regard to its poor applicability for the analysis of specific social normative behaviour, and for its lack of a clearly defined middle category between excuses and justifications. In order to redefine and expand the fourfold typology, the ways model of account giving is introduced, containing referentialization as a fifth meta-category of account giving. Here, an actor who is internally or externally accused of a normviolation connects the questioned behaviour with exonerating context information. This information is intended to ameliorate the actor's culpability by making reference to other norms, to other behaviours committed by the actor or to the behaviours of other persons; the actor acknowledges, however, that a norm has been violated. Determinants and impacts of referentialization are discussed with regard to the analysis of norm compliance, intrapersonal dynamics and interpersonal conflict.