Blame attribution as a moderator of perceptions of sexual orientation-based hate crimes.
ABSTRACT Blame attribution is a valuable mechanism explaining decision making. However, present literature mainly employs blame attribution as a dependent variable. The shortcoming of this fact is that blame attribution offers a potentially valuable explanatory mechanism for decision making. The authors designed two studies to investigate blame attribution as a moderator of sentencing decisions in sexual orientation-based hate crimes. Study 1 showed that mock jurors punished perpetrators of hate crimes more severely than a control condition. Also, degree of victim blame influenced punitive decision making. In Study 2, mock jurors extended findings that perpetrators of hate crimes are more harshly punished than those of other types of crimes. Victim and perpetrator blame failed to moderate decision making in this more complex scenario. Results are discussed in relation to hate crimes definitions and attribution theory.
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Drawing on legal and psychological theory of blame, the present study evaluates psychometric properties of the Perceptions of Blame Scale (PBS; Rayburn, Mendoza, & Davison, 200334. Rayburn , N. , Mendoza , M. and Davison , G. C. 2003. Bystanders’ perceptions of perpetrators and victims of hate crime: An investigation using the person perception paradigm. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 18(9): 1055–1074. doi:10.1177/0886260503254513 [CrossRef], [PubMed], [Web of Science ®]View all references) across crimes of varying severity (i.e., misdemeanor assault, felony assault, and murder) and motivation (gay hate crime victim versus heterosexual victim perceived as gay). Results revealed support for a single-factor model of perceptions of perpetrator blame in a panel of jury-eligible community members. Perceptions of blame in this study moderated the impact of crime motivation on the sentencing decision. Results are discussed with regard to legal and psychological perspectives of blame in a jury research paradigm.Victims & Offenders 01/2013; 8(1):42-55. DOI:10.1080/15564886.2012.745458
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: The parent-child relationship is woven deep within historical and contemporary culture, but strong retributive ideals have led to blaming parents because of their presumed vicarious role in juvenile crime. The current article will discuss the history, forms, legal challenges, and empirical research related to parental involvement laws in the United States. The parent-child relationship provides the historical framework behind the separate juvenile justice parens patriae system; however, with the juvenile justice system not as successful as originally imagined, blame has shifted to the parents. We examine the potential constitutional implications of enacting and enforcing parental involvement statutes and ordinances and also the potential efficacy of parental involvement laws in reducing juvenile delinquency. In addition, we propose empirical research to test the underlying assumptions about blame made by parental involvement laws.Social Issues and Policy Review 03/2012; 6(1). DOI:10.1111/j.1751-2409.2011.01034.x
12/2012, Degree: Doctor of Philosophy