Attribution Of Blame Research Articles

Perceptions of Common Rape: How Rape Myth Acceptance, Victim Gender, and Victim Resistance Affect Victim and Perpetrator Blame Attributions in Party Rape and Date Rape.

Among rape perception studies, common types of male rape remain understudied. Using a randomized vignette design, I sampled 622 college students from a large Southwestern university to examine how victim gender and victim resistance influence blame attributions in party rape and date rape. Results revealed important interactions between victim gender, victim resistance, and rape type. Among other effects, resistance only affected victim blame in date rapes involving male victims. Results indicated that how respondents perceive victim and perpetrator responsibility, and which factors influence these perceptions, vary across rape type and victim gender. Implications for the rape perception literature are discussed.

Victim blaming and slut shaming: when the victim is criminalized, not the sex offender

The phenomenon of sexual abuse and violence has always existed in our society, as in others, and is more or less tolerated depending on the historical context in which it is framed. Since the 1980s, scholars have begun to investigate the phenomenon of victim blaming in relation to gender-based violence and, more specifically, in relation to sexual violence. These researches have provided numerous evidence that the attribution of blame to victims of violence is a dis-perception in the eyes of the percipients, whose judgments are significantly influenced by false beliefs and stereotypes about violence and the characteristics of the actors involved. The objective of this article is to provide an analysis of the phenomenon of victim blaming, or the attribution of blame to victims, in the event of violence by sex offenders, proposing a reflection on the victimization processes and the dynamics that underlie them, whose reading cannot only be criminological, psychological and juridical but which also requires a purely sociological reading. Particular attention was also given to the way in which victims of sexual assault are exploited by the mass media, and to the notion of sexual violence against men and the possible false reports.

A Study on Knowledge, Attitudes, and Beliefs of Sri Lankan Forensic Practitioners towards Sexual Assault Survivors

<strong><em>Introduction: </em></strong>Sexual assault is a global problem with impacts on physical/ mental health. Sexual assault survivors experience negative social reactions such as stigmatization and blame attribution. Negative social reactions can lead to detrimental effects on mental health. It has been shown that negative reactions exist among the service providers for this group. This study examines the perception of forensic practitioners regarding sexual assault survivors. <em> </em> <strong><em>Methodology: </em></strong>An online questionnaire comprised of 22 questions was sent out to forensic practitioners of Sri Lanka, who are the primary contacts of sexual assault survivors in the hospital setting. The questions addressed knowledge, attitudes and beliefs towards the sexual assault survivors. <em> </em> <strong><em>Results: </em></strong>A sample of 51 responded to the questionnaire out of more than 100 invitees. Only 46% of the forensic practitioners reported that they never feel reluctant to examine sexual assault cases. An average of 71% responded positively to all the correct statements regarding knowledge. The average percentage of participants who responded negatively to the negative statements regarding attitudes/ believes was 57%. A percentage of 39% responded as “agree” or “strongly agree” for the two positive statements regarding attitudes/ believes. <em> </em> <strong><em>Conclusion: </em></strong>The findings of our study highlight the requirement of training programs and further studies to address the negative beliefs and attitudes among the primary health contacts of sexual assault survivors.

The role of moral explanations and structural inequalities in experiences of mental illness stigma in Northern Minas Gerais, Brazil.

The process of stigmatization within different cultural contexts has long been viewed as essential in understanding the course and outcomes of mental illness. However, little research has examined which cultural constructs and categories are used to explain mental illness, and how they contribute to the way people with mental illness experience stigma and social exclusion, as well as how these beliefs affect healthcare practices. This study examines meanings ascribed to mental illness and experiences of stigma among four groups in urban settings of Minas Gerais, Brazil: persons with mental illness; their families; members of the lay public; and health professionals working at an alternative community-based psychosocial treatment service or a local university hospital. Qualitative methods, including semi-structured interviews and participant observation, were conducted with a purposive sample of 72 participants. Data were analyzed through content analysis. The findings suggest that stigma and discrimination are intrinsically rooted in a systemic process of social exclusion generated by meanings ascribed to mental illness and the structural vulnerabilities of the mental healthcare system. The findings further suggest that structural inequality is a powerful factor behind lay concepts of mental illness and that this is particularly harmful because it reinforces personal blame attributions instead of addressing the hidden structural forces that contribute to mental illness. The study highlights the subtle interrelations between cultural beliefs and structural vulnerabilities that should be addressed in mental health policy in order to diminish the effects of stigma on people with mental illnesses.

Blame shifting and blame obfuscation: The blame avoidance effects of delegation in the European Union

AbstractThe delegation of governance tasks to third parties is generally assumed to help governments to avoid blame once policies become contested. International organizations, including the European Union (EU), are considered particularly opportune in this regard. The literature lacks assessments of the blame avoidance effects of delegation, let alone of the effects of different delegation designs. To address this gap in the literature, we study public blame attributions in the media coverage of two contested EU policies during the financial crisis and the migration crisis. We show that the blame avoidance effect of delegation depends on the delegation design: When agents are independent (dependent) of government control, we observe lower (higher) shares of public blame attributions targeting the government (blame shifting effect), and when agents are external (internal) to the government apparatus, overall public blame attributions for a contested policy will be less (more) frequent (blame obfuscation effect). Our findings yield important normative implications for how to maintain governments’ accountability once they have delegated governance tasks to third parties.

Selecting evidence to frame the consequences of adverse childhood experiences: testing effects on public support for policy action, multi-sector responsibility, and stigma

While clinical and public health researchers have produced a high volume of research evidence about the consequences of ACEs, there is limited research on public understanding of ACEs or how to most effectively communicate about this body of science. The objective of this study was to determine which messages describing evidence about the consequences of adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) affect public perceptions. We conducted an online experiment with a nationally-representative sample of U.S. adults in July–August 2020. Participants were randomized to control groups receiving messages describing ACE prevalence or resilience, or treatment groups receiving messages describing consequences of ACEs on mental health and substance use, economics, racial equity, or biology. We compared respondents' perceptions of prevention policies and likelihood of policy engagement, attributions of multi-sector responsibility, and blame and stigma across experimental groups. Messages about economic consequences increased respondents' support for policy and attributions of multi-sector responsibility relative to control groups, while also increasing parental blame. The message describing racial equity lowered respondents' perceptions of importance of state policy action and attributions of responsibility to health care. None of the messages affected stigmatizing attitudes. Describing the economic consequences of ACEs on public systems boosts public support for policy action. More research is needed on how the public responds to messaging connecting systemic racism with childhood adversity and health.

Translation and validation of the Norwegian version of the Injustice Experience Questionnaire.

Perceived injustice is a theoretical construct comprising elements of loss, attribution of blame, and sense of unfairness. Patients with chronic pain often report high levels of perceived injustice, which can have negative impact on physiological and psychosocial aspects and treatment outcome. The Injustice Experience Questionnaire (IEQ) is a self-report 12-item questionnaire that shows good reliability and validity in patients with chronic pain. This study aimed to translate, validate, and expand the useof the Norwegian Injustice Experience Questionnaire (IEQ-N) to a chronic pain population. A mixed-method approach was used to translate and validate the IEQ-N. It was forward-back translated, linguistically validated, and culturally adapted. Individual cognitive debriefing interviews (n=7) and a focus group interview (n=9) was used to explore the patients' experience with- and understanding of the questionnaire. Statistical descriptive, correlational, factor- and regression analyses were used to investigate the IEQ-N validity, reliability, and factorial structure in a large registry sample (n=3,068) of patients with chronic pain. Patients with chronic pain found the IEQ-N relevant. Registry analyses supported that the IEQ-N had a one-factor structure. The internal consistency was high (Chronbach's alpha=0.92). The construct validity was good, with moderate to strong significant univariate correlation (r=0.29-0.71) (p<0.05) between perceived injustice and related constructs of pain catastrophizing, pain severity, disability, psychological distress, and quality of life. Perceived injustice contributed with significant but small unique variance to pain-related factors (i.e.,pain intensity, pain-related disability, psychological distress), but the additional contribution beyond pain catastrophizing was small (0.2-6.7%) (p<0.05). Patients in the study found the questionnaire relevant for their situation, and easy to understand. This study provides a reliable and valid Norwegian tool to assess perceived injustice in patients with chronic pain. REK sør-øst, 2016/1942.

Beyond comparisons: The complexity and context‐dependency of collective victim beliefs

AbstractSocial psychological research on collective victimhood has focused on just a few ways in which people think about the ingroup's victimization that imply certain assumptions and limit our understanding of collective victim beliefs. Additionally, different historical and sociopolitical contexts may make different collective victim beliefs relevant. This article examines collective victim beliefs expressed in open‐ended survey responses among six different groups: Northern Irish participants, Greek Cypriots, Hungarians, Poles, Jewish Americans, and Armenian Americans (N = 638). Qualitative content analysis revealed five broader categories with several collective victim beliefs each. General appraisals of the ingroup's collective victimization entailed centrality of ingroup victimization versus defocusing victimhood. More specific appraisals included context‐specific characteristics of the ingroup's victimization, perceptions of the perpetrator group (attributions of blame), and perceptions of other victim groups (comparative victim beliefs, including rejecting comparisons). The findings extend and challenge commonly studied collective victim beliefs, and propose novel theoretical directions.

Ingroup identification moderates blame attributions for the COVID‐19 crisis, and willingness to help ingroup and outgroup members

AbstractThe present studies focussed on how blame attributions for an existing problem and decisions to help those negatively impacted by it are affected by group membership and social identity considerations. This was investigated in the context of the COVID‐19 pandemic, asking British nationals about their attributions regarding the pandemic in terms of culpability of the British national ingroup and the Chinese, a national outgroup to the participants. Willingness to help those negatively impacted by the pandemic was also assessed, separately for help offered to ingroup and outgroup members. It was hypothesized that blame attributions and helping decisions would be driven by identity concerns, such that outgroup blame would be stronger than ingroup blame, that ingroup help would be offered more willingly than outgroup help, and that these effects would be especially pronounced for those strongly identified with their national ingroup. Support for the predictions were found in an exploratory online survey of British nationals (N = 250), and in a preregistered second study (N = 250). Theoretical and practical implications of the findings are discussed.

Threat perceptions, blame attribution, and political trust

ABSTRACT Under what conditions do threat perceptions lead to an increasing distrust in government? This article argues that the answer is the degree of ease with which a perceived threat can be linked to governmental actors. First, I argue that threats directed toward society should be more easily linked by citizens to the domestic government compared to perceived threats to the individual (general linkage). Second, a threat linked to a citizen’s general political stance more strongly affects their attitude toward governmental actors in negative ways (heuristic linkage). Third, I expect threat perceptions to further increase governmental distrust if the latter’s actors are blamed for a perceived threat that is salient to citizens’ ideological worldviews (blame attribution). Empirical tests using self-administered survey- and experimental data corroborate the argument. In closing I discuss the implications of the theoretical and empirical setup, emphasizing the need for future studies on blame attribution, heuristic linkages, and political trust.

How Communicating about Discrimination Influences Attributions of Blame and Condemnation

AbstractAcross two randomized experiments, we examine how communication about discriminatory acts can influence judgments of blame and condemnation. Specifically, we consider whether attributing discrimination to implicit or explicit bias affects how people evaluate online reports of discrimination. In Study 1 (N = 947), we explore this question in the context of an online news environment, and in Study 2 (N = 121) we replicate our results on a social media site (i.e., Twitter). Across both studies, we document how viewers respond differently to reports of discrimination due to variation in agent motives, the type of bias that purportedly caused the discriminatory behavior, and the extent to which agents are reported to have completed implicit bias training. We discuss our theoretical contribution to perspectives of blame attribution and the communication of bias as well as the practical implications of our findings.

To Blame is Human: A Quantitative Systematic Review of the Relationship Between Outcome Severity of Large-Scale Crises and Attributions of Blame.

In crisis situations, time is of the essence. Effective messaging to individuals at risk is critical to mitigating the most severe outcomes. Extant crisis communication literature has focused on differentiating crisis types based on perceived blame, particularly in cases of for-profit company malfeasance, but less work has been done to understand how the public makes these types of attributions. This quantitative systematic review investigates the relationship between severity of a large-scale crisis outcome and attributions of blame toward relevant entities. Moderators of interest include the attribution term used with participants (e.g., blame, responsibility), the type of crisis event, and the entity presented as at fault. Overall, a small but significant positive relationship is identified in the majority of studies between severity of a large-scale crisis outcome and attributions of blame. Results suggest that while crisis type and entity to blame are moderators, the attribution term(s) used with participants plays a less significant role. Implications and future directions are considered.

Narcissistic admiration and rivalry and reactions to romantic breakup

This study examined how narcissism, described by the Narcissistic Admiration and Rivalry Concept (NARC), relates to reactions to romantic relationship dissolution. 246 participants completed a survey assessing the NARC components, and measures concerning a specific past relationship: Emotional reactions immediately following breakup, perceptions of the ex-partner, responsibility for initiating and attributions of blame for problems leading to breakup. Narcissistic rivalry was associated with greater externalized (anger) and internalized (sadness and anxiety) negative emotion, while narcissistic admiration was associated with greater anger and less sadness. Narcissistic admiration was associated with more positive and rivalry with more negative trait perceptions of the ex-partner. Narcissism was unrelated to attributions of blame for the breakup or relationship problems, but admiration was associated with a greater role in initiating breakup.

Portrayals of Animals in COVID-19 News Media

ABSTRACT With animals as the primary and intermediary vectors of COVID-19, we sought to understand the ways in which animals were represented in UK news media during the emergence of the global pandemic and how these portrayals impact the lives of humans and animals. Using the Lexis-Nexis online media archive, we searched for news media reports featuring animals during the emergence of COVID-19 in the UK from the period January–October 2020. We analyzed a total of 452 news articles from three UK newspapers: Daily Mail, The Sun (both tabloids), and The Guardian (a broadsheet). Newspaper articles were thematically coded and qualitatively analyzed for emergent themes. Using a trans-species lens, whereby we view the shared commonalities between species as a challenge to anthropocentric hierarchies of human dominance, we explore three main themes: “It’s their fault,” “It’s not their fault,” and “It’s our fault.” Each theme illustrates how animals are represented by news media in the attribution of blame and victimhood of those impacted by the coronavirus pandemic. Our results show that animals are utilized by today’s polarized media as tools to promote the political and social ideals of the press and their respective readership. The tabloids used animals for the promotion of bigotry, xenophobia, and racism. In comparison, The Guardian held a pro-environmental stance by framing the zoonotic disease as a platform to challenge the human–animal dichotomy and advocate for environmental, human, and animal equality. Domestic companion animals received the greatest positive media coverage across the newspapers, particularly in relation to the value of the human–animal bond for human health during the lockdown. In comparison, across the broadsheet and tabloid press, animals in research received limited coverage. Research animals were neither recognized for their contribution to human health nor as vulnerable others impacted by COVID-19. The specific impacts of these themes upon animals are discussed.

The Double Standard Toward Female and Male Victims of Non-consensual Dissemination of Intimate Images.

Non-consensual dissemination of intimate images (NCII) is a growing problem of sexual violence with grave consequences for victims. However, despite recent criminalization and civil and legal sanctions, there is reason to suspect that the majority of NCII cases remain unreported. The reasons for that may be similar to the ones accounting for under-reporting in cases of physical sexual violence and are tied to society's attitude toward victims. Being a relatively new form of violence, psychological research on perceptions of NCII victims and offenders is scarce. The purpose of the present study was to extend the current knowledge by comparing perceptions toward female and male victims of NCII, while manipulating the victim's role in producing the intimate material. Drawing on rape research, it was hypothesized that gender stereotypes interact with victims' sex and behavior to influence the way victims are perceived. Five-hundred and thirty-nine male and female students were presented with a scenario depicting an NCII offense in which the intimate material was either self-generated by the victim (selfies) or stealth-taken by the victim's ex-intimate partner. Victim and offender sex were also manipulated. The findings indicate a differential treatment toward female and male victims of NCII, depending on their role in the taking of the intimate images. More blaming was attributed toward a female victim whose intimate images were self-taken, in comparison to all other research conditions, and negative feelings toward her were the highest as well. These blame attributions, as well as negative feelings toward female victims, were particularly high on the side of male participants. The findings are interpreted as reflecting perceptions of traditional gender roles and a double standard toward female and male sexual behavior.

‘Enemies of the people’: Donald Trump and the security imaginary of America First

The discursive domain of (in)security is integral to nationalist populism, as documented in the political rhetoric of Donald Trump. This article combines insights from political psychology on blame attribution with scholarship in International Relations on security narratives to show how the reframing of national identity through a populist security imaginary elevated internal ‘enemies of the people’ to an ontological status of equal, or even superior standing to that of external threats to national security. Portraying internal and external Others as equally existential threats endangering the ‘real’ United States informed both foreign policy choices and mobilised voters through an affective persuasion of audiences, actively dividing society for political gain. Populist appeals to resentment, fear, and anxiety constituted a shared affective space between Trump and his followers that provided a source of mutual ontological reassurance and the legitimation of America First measures from immigration restrictions to trade protectionism and a Jacksonian foreign policy.

Sexual Intimate Partner Violence: Effects of Prejudice toward Bisexual and Gay Men on Victim Blame

Bisexual men are one of the least studied populations within the sexual intimate partner violence (SIPV) literature, despite the prevalence of SIPV being equivalent between bisexual and gay men, and greater in bisexual than heterosexual men. Consequently, it remains unclear as to what factors contribute to SIPV–related victim blame toward bisexual men. The current study utilized a mixed–methods design to investigate prejudiced attitudes toward bisexual and gay men as predictors of victim blame in the context of SIPV. Participants (N = 124) were randomly assigned to read a vignette wherein a bisexual or gay man disclosed an experience of SIPV. Participants then completed measures of victim blame and prejudiced attitudes toward bisexual or gay men. As a means of contextualizing the quantitative analyses, participants also completed a qualitative stereotype task. Results indicated that prejudiced attitudes toward both bisexual and gay men predicted victim blame, and that victim blame attributions toward bisexual and gay men did not differ. Qualitative findings indicated that there was overlap between the stereotypes attributed to bisexual and gay men, which may explain the lack of difference in victim blame toward the two groups. These results implicate prejudice reduction and controlled stereotype processing strategies as a means of reducing victim blame attributions toward sexual minority men.

Observer reactions to workplace mistreatment: It's a matter of perspective.

Workplace mistreatment regularly occurs in the presence of others (i.e., observers). The reactions of observers toward those involved in the mistreatment episode have wide-reaching implications. In the current set of studies, we draw on theories of perspective-taking to consider how this form of interpersonal sensemaking influences observer reactions toward those involved in a witnessed incident of workplace mistreatment. We find that observers' blame attributions and empathic concern for the individual whose perspective is taken explain the positive effects of perspective-taking on observer attitudes toward and performance evaluations of both the target and instigator of a witnessed incident of mistreatment. We also find that the effect of perspective-taking on observer reactions is stronger when the witnessed mistreatment is more severe. Finally, we find that although observer perspective-taking in the context of mistreatment can be encouraged, the effect seems to benefit instigators' performance evaluations rather than targets'. Implications for targets, instigators, and organizations are discussed. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

“Are you asking me or are you telling me?”: Expertise, evidence, and blame attribution in a post-game interview

This paper is an analysis of a video clip of an interview between a reporter and ice hockey player following a game in which the player was involved in a hard collision with a member of the opposing team. The paper explores blame attribution and how participants claim and disclaim expertise in a way that supports or undermines assertions to have correctly seen and assessed the actions shown on tape. Our analysis focuses on the video of the interview, and it also examines relevant video clips of the collision and various commentaries about the identities of the characters and their actions shown on the videos. In brief, the study is a third-order investigation of recorded-actions-under-analysis. It uses the videos and commentaries as “perspicuous phenomena” that illuminate and complicate how the members’ own action category analysis is bound up with issues of expertise, evidence, and blame.

Local Impact of Global Crises, Institutional Trust, and Consumer Well-Being: Evidence from the COVID-19 Pandemic

Global crises have become increasingly more frequent and consequential. Yet the impact of these crises is unevenly distributed across countries, leading to discrepancies in (inter)national crisis-regulating institutions’ ability to uphold public trust and safeguard their constituents’ well-being. Employing the paradigm of citizens as customers of political institutions, drawing on attribution and sociopolitical trust theories, and using the COVID-19 pandemic as an empirical context, the authors investigate how consumers’ relative perceptions of local impact following a global crisis affect the psychological processes of institutional trust formation and consumer well-being. Conducting one survey-based study in two countries affected disproportionately by the pandemic’s first wave (the United States and Greece) and one experimental study in a third country (Italy) during the pandemic’s second wave, the authors find that institutional trust declines more in countries whose citizens hold perceptions of higher relative local impact following a global crisis; institutional blame attributions explain trust erosion; institutional distrust decreases consumer well-being and adherence to institutional guidelines; consumers’ globalization attitudes immunize international institutions from blame and distrust; and political conservatives transfer blame and distrust from national to international institutions amid global crises. The findings enrich the institutional branding and trust literatures and have implications for stakeholders involved in global crisis management (e.g., policy makers, political marketers, institutional brand managers).