TY - JOUR
T1 - Reactions to offenders: Psychological differences between beliefs versus punishment
AU - Fousiani, Kyriaki
AU - van Prooijen, Jan Willem
PY - 2019/10
Y1 - 2019/10
N2 - In the present research, we examined a discrepancy between people's beliefs about, versus punitive reactions towards, offenders. Particularly, appraisals of offenders along the dimension of communion (i.e., being friendly or trustworthy) should primarily affect people's beliefs about them, as reflected in demonizing and conspiracy theories, and to a lesser extent observers’ punitive reactions. However, actual evidence of transgression should (more strongly than beliefs) influence observers’ punitive reactions. In two studies, we manipulated communion and transgression ambiguity in the context of financial offences. The transgression was presented as either an observable and clear-cut immoral case (non-ambiguous transgression) or as a case that involves a grey area between what is legal or illegal (ambiguous transgression). Study 1 revealed that viewing an offender as low (as opposed to high) in communion predominantly influenced demonization and conspiracy beliefs involving the offender. The transgression manipulation, however, mostly influenced observers’ punitive reactions and their underlying punitive motives. Similar findings were obtained in Study 2. We conclude that although beliefs about offenders and punitive reactions are often strongly related, they are actually grounded in different psychological processes.
AB - In the present research, we examined a discrepancy between people's beliefs about, versus punitive reactions towards, offenders. Particularly, appraisals of offenders along the dimension of communion (i.e., being friendly or trustworthy) should primarily affect people's beliefs about them, as reflected in demonizing and conspiracy theories, and to a lesser extent observers’ punitive reactions. However, actual evidence of transgression should (more strongly than beliefs) influence observers’ punitive reactions. In two studies, we manipulated communion and transgression ambiguity in the context of financial offences. The transgression was presented as either an observable and clear-cut immoral case (non-ambiguous transgression) or as a case that involves a grey area between what is legal or illegal (ambiguous transgression). Study 1 revealed that viewing an offender as low (as opposed to high) in communion predominantly influenced demonization and conspiracy beliefs involving the offender. The transgression manipulation, however, mostly influenced observers’ punitive reactions and their underlying punitive motives. Similar findings were obtained in Study 2. We conclude that although beliefs about offenders and punitive reactions are often strongly related, they are actually grounded in different psychological processes.
KW - Communion
KW - Conspiracy beliefs
KW - Demonization
KW - Motives for punishment
KW - Punishment intention
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85062801997&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85062801997&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1111/bjso.12320
DO - 10.1111/bjso.12320
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85062801997
SN - 0144-6665
VL - 58
SP - 894
EP - 916
JO - British Journal of Social Psychology
JF - British Journal of Social Psychology
IS - 4
ER -