A dual-motive model of scapegoating: Displacing blame to reduce guilt or increase control.

Abstract

The authors present a model that specifies 2 psychological motives underlying scapegoating, defined as attributing inordinate blame for a negative outcome to a target individual or group, (a) maintaining perceived personal moral value by minimizing feelings of guilt over one's responsibility for a negative outcome and (b) maintaining perceived personal control by obtaining a clear explanation for a negative outcome that otherwise seems inexplicable. Three studies supported hypotheses derived from this dual-motive model. Framing a negative outcome (environmental destruction or climate change) as caused by one's own harmful actions (value threat) or unknown sources (control threat) both increased scapegoating, and these effects occurred indirectly through feelings of guilt and perceived personal control, respectively (Study 1), and were differentially moderated by affirmations of moral value and personal control (Study 2). Also, scapegoating in response to value threat versus control threat produced divergent, theoretically specified effects on self-perceptions and behavioral intentions (Study 3).

Compensatory control and the appeal of a structured world.

“…Rothschild et al (2012; Study 2) conceptually replicated these findings with a situational manipulation of personal agency affir mation. Participants led to focus on uncontrollable (vs. controlla ble) causes behind climate change were more likely to blame and penalize international corporations for their role in climate change.…”

Exploring the role of incidental emotions in support for climate change policy

“…We speculate that an explanation may reside in the complex motivations that accompany the experience of guilt. In line with the fundamental socialcognitive motive to draw conclusions that paint the self in a positive light (Kunda 1990), guilt may not only lead people to hold themselves responsible for negative outcomes they cause, but it may also lead them to attempt to purge their guilt and responsibility by scapegoating others (Rothschild et al 2012). In addition, in the case of such highly polarized issues as climate change, the attribution pattern for blame and responsibility is rather complex, perhaps even more so than Fig.…”

The effect of intergroup threat and social identity salience on the belief in conspiracy theories over terrorism in indonesia: collective angst as a mediator

“…This scholar argued that the belief in conspiracy theories serves to regain people's sense of order and predictability in coping with threatening social events. In this regard, belief in conspiracy theories can be very instrumental to regulate people's distress in response to threatening social events, wherein people attribute the events to specific enemies rather than unmanageable factors or irregularities (Rothschild, Landau, Sullivan, & Keefer, 2012;Sullivan, Landau, & Rothschild, 2010). The Model of Compensatory Control (Kay, Whitson, Gaucher, & Galinsky, 2009) also describes that belief in conspiracy theories can be functional to reinstall people's sense of control over threatening events that evoke anxiety and discomfort.…”