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 judgme...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Personality & social psychology bulletin 2008-10, Vol.34 (10), p.1371-1381
Hauptverfasser: Alicke, Mark D., Buckingham, Justin, Zell, Ethan, Davis, Teresa
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 1381
container_issue 10
container_start_page 1371
container_title Personality & social psychology bulletin
container_volume 34
creator Alicke, Mark D.
Buckingham, Justin
Zell, Ethan
Davis, Teresa
description 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.
doi_str_mv 10.1177/0146167208321594
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_69513194</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sage_id>10.1177_0146167208321594</sage_id><sourcerecordid>69513194</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-a417t-b3ea1246c00f8adb7085dc87901c4c66318d27ee323ce1bd1dde70139fd250ac3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkc1Lw0AQxRdRtFbvniQgeIvu7HeOWvyCgiJ6DpvdSVvZZms2OfS_N6UFRRBPM_B-7w0zQ8gZ0CsAra8pCAVKM2o4A1mIPTICKVmuBef7ZLSR841-RI5T-qCUCiXYITkCo4QwUo3I46QPK1sFzCax6doYMtv4oe-bDtvauq63IXtFm2KzaGbZosm6OWYvae3mMcTZOot1dhvsEk_IQW1DwtNdHZP3-7u3yWM-fX54mtxMcytAd3nF0QITylFaG-srTY30zuiCghNOKQ7GM43IGXcIlQfvUVPgRe2ZpNbxMbnc5q7a-Nlj6srlIjkMwTYY-1SqQgKHQvwLSs2kAQ0DePEL_Ih92wxLlFAww4ELvomjW8q1MaUW63LVLpa2XZdAy80zyt_PGCznu-C-WqL_NuyuPwD5Fkh2hj-m_hX4BWCfj5E</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1928313434</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Culpable Control and Counterfactual Reasoning in the Psychology of Blame</title><source>Access via SAGE</source><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Sociological Abstracts</source><source>Applied Social Sciences Index &amp; Abstracts (ASSIA)</source><creator>Alicke, Mark D. ; Buckingham, Justin ; Zell, Ethan ; Davis, Teresa</creator><creatorcontrib>Alicke, Mark D. ; Buckingham, Justin ; Zell, Ethan ; Davis, Teresa</creatorcontrib><description>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.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0146-1672</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1552-7433</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1177/0146167208321594</identifier><identifier>PMID: 18644856</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Los Angeles, CA: SAGE Publications</publisher><subject>Ascription ; Attribution ; Blame ; Causality ; Cognition ; Compensation ; Counterfactual thinking ; Crime Victims - psychology ; Culpability ; Death &amp; dying ; Doctors ; Guilt ; Humans ; Intention ; Interpersonal Relations ; Judgment ; Judgments ; Malpractice ; Medical Errors - legislation &amp; jurisprudence ; Physicians ; Precautions ; Psychology ; Shame ; Social Behavior ; Social Perception ; Social Responsibility ; Volition</subject><ispartof>Personality &amp; social psychology bulletin, 2008-10, Vol.34 (10), p.1371-1381</ispartof><rights>Copyright SAGE PUBLICATIONS, INC. Oct 2008</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-a417t-b3ea1246c00f8adb7085dc87901c4c66318d27ee323ce1bd1dde70139fd250ac3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-a417t-b3ea1246c00f8adb7085dc87901c4c66318d27ee323ce1bd1dde70139fd250ac3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/0146167208321594$$EPDF$$P50$$Gsage$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0146167208321594$$EHTML$$P50$$Gsage$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,21819,27924,27925,30999,31000,33774,43621,43622</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18644856$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Alicke, Mark D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Buckingham, Justin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zell, Ethan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Davis, Teresa</creatorcontrib><title>Culpable Control and Counterfactual Reasoning in the Psychology of Blame</title><title>Personality &amp; social psychology bulletin</title><addtitle>Pers Soc Psychol Bull</addtitle><description>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.</description><subject>Ascription</subject><subject>Attribution</subject><subject>Blame</subject><subject>Causality</subject><subject>Cognition</subject><subject>Compensation</subject><subject>Counterfactual thinking</subject><subject>Crime Victims - psychology</subject><subject>Culpability</subject><subject>Death &amp; dying</subject><subject>Doctors</subject><subject>Guilt</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Intention</subject><subject>Interpersonal Relations</subject><subject>Judgment</subject><subject>Judgments</subject><subject>Malpractice</subject><subject>Medical Errors - legislation &amp; jurisprudence</subject><subject>Physicians</subject><subject>Precautions</subject><subject>Psychology</subject><subject>Shame</subject><subject>Social Behavior</subject><subject>Social Perception</subject><subject>Social Responsibility</subject><subject>Volition</subject><issn>0146-1672</issn><issn>1552-7433</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2008</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>7QJ</sourceid><sourceid>BHHNA</sourceid><recordid>eNqFkc1Lw0AQxRdRtFbvniQgeIvu7HeOWvyCgiJ6DpvdSVvZZms2OfS_N6UFRRBPM_B-7w0zQ8gZ0CsAra8pCAVKM2o4A1mIPTICKVmuBef7ZLSR841-RI5T-qCUCiXYITkCo4QwUo3I46QPK1sFzCax6doYMtv4oe-bDtvauq63IXtFm2KzaGbZosm6OWYvae3mMcTZOot1dhvsEk_IQW1DwtNdHZP3-7u3yWM-fX54mtxMcytAd3nF0QITylFaG-srTY30zuiCghNOKQ7GM43IGXcIlQfvUVPgRe2ZpNbxMbnc5q7a-Nlj6srlIjkMwTYY-1SqQgKHQvwLSs2kAQ0DePEL_Ih92wxLlFAww4ELvomjW8q1MaUW63LVLpa2XZdAy80zyt_PGCznu-C-WqL_NuyuPwD5Fkh2hj-m_hX4BWCfj5E</recordid><startdate>200810</startdate><enddate>200810</enddate><creator>Alicke, Mark D.</creator><creator>Buckingham, Justin</creator><creator>Zell, Ethan</creator><creator>Davis, Teresa</creator><general>SAGE Publications</general><general>SAGE PUBLICATIONS, INC</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7QJ</scope><scope>7U4</scope><scope>BHHNA</scope><scope>DWI</scope><scope>WZK</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>200810</creationdate><title>Culpable Control and Counterfactual Reasoning in the Psychology of Blame</title><author>Alicke, Mark D. ; Buckingham, Justin ; Zell, Ethan ; Davis, Teresa</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-a417t-b3ea1246c00f8adb7085dc87901c4c66318d27ee323ce1bd1dde70139fd250ac3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2008</creationdate><topic>Ascription</topic><topic>Attribution</topic><topic>Blame</topic><topic>Causality</topic><topic>Cognition</topic><topic>Compensation</topic><topic>Counterfactual thinking</topic><topic>Crime Victims - psychology</topic><topic>Culpability</topic><topic>Death &amp; dying</topic><topic>Doctors</topic><topic>Guilt</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Intention</topic><topic>Interpersonal Relations</topic><topic>Judgment</topic><topic>Judgments</topic><topic>Malpractice</topic><topic>Medical Errors - legislation &amp; jurisprudence</topic><topic>Physicians</topic><topic>Precautions</topic><topic>Psychology</topic><topic>Shame</topic><topic>Social Behavior</topic><topic>Social Perception</topic><topic>Social Responsibility</topic><topic>Volition</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Alicke, Mark D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Buckingham, Justin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zell, Ethan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Davis, Teresa</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Applied Social Sciences Index &amp; Abstracts (ASSIA)</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts (pre-2017)</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Personality &amp; social psychology bulletin</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Alicke, Mark D.</au><au>Buckingham, Justin</au><au>Zell, Ethan</au><au>Davis, Teresa</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Culpable Control and Counterfactual Reasoning in the Psychology of Blame</atitle><jtitle>Personality &amp; social psychology bulletin</jtitle><addtitle>Pers Soc Psychol Bull</addtitle><date>2008-10</date><risdate>2008</risdate><volume>34</volume><issue>10</issue><spage>1371</spage><epage>1381</epage><pages>1371-1381</pages><issn>0146-1672</issn><eissn>1552-7433</eissn><abstract>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.</abstract><cop>Los Angeles, CA</cop><pub>SAGE Publications</pub><pmid>18644856</pmid><doi>10.1177/0146167208321594</doi><tpages>11</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0146-1672
ispartof Personality & social psychology bulletin, 2008-10, Vol.34 (10), p.1371-1381
issn 0146-1672
1552-7433
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_69513194
source Access via SAGE; MEDLINE; Sociological Abstracts; Applied Social Sciences Index & Abstracts (ASSIA)
subjects Ascription
Attribution
Blame
Causality
Cognition
Compensation
Counterfactual thinking
Crime Victims - psychology
Culpability
Death & dying
Doctors
Guilt
Humans
Intention
Interpersonal Relations
Judgment
Judgments
Malpractice
Medical Errors - legislation & jurisprudence
Physicians
Precautions
Psychology
Shame
Social Behavior
Social Perception
Social Responsibility
Volition
title Culpable Control and Counterfactual Reasoning in the Psychology of Blame
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-26T18%3A38%3A38IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Culpable%20Control%20and%20Counterfactual%20Reasoning%20in%20the%20Psychology%20of%20Blame&rft.jtitle=Personality%20&%20social%20psychology%20bulletin&rft.au=Alicke,%20Mark%20D.&rft.date=2008-10&rft.volume=34&rft.issue=10&rft.spage=1371&rft.epage=1381&rft.pages=1371-1381&rft.issn=0146-1672&rft.eissn=1552-7433&rft_id=info:doi/10.1177/0146167208321594&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E69513194%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1928313434&rft_id=info:pmid/18644856&rft_sage_id=10.1177_0146167208321594&rfr_iscdi=true