Attributions of freedom by actors and observers.

Gurwitz, Sharon B.; Panciera, Lawrence

doi:10.1037/h0077088

Cited by 13 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Specifically, subjects were asked to judge how free the actor was to behave as he wanted. This question has been successfully used in research on decision freedom and outcome freedom (see Bringle et al, 1973, andGurwitz &Panciera, 1975). It was expected that as a result of these differences in procedure, the effect of prior information on freedom judgments would be stronger in Experiment 2 than in Experiment 1.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Extrinsic rewards, congruence between dispositions and behaviors, and perceived freedom.

Trope¹

1978

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Extrinsic rewards, congruence between dispositions and behaviors, and perceived freedom.

Trope¹

1978

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…According to the actor-observer model, jurors may respond judgmentally toward rape victims either because (a) they are functioning as rational observers whose literal perspective of the rape incident emphasizes the salience of the victim's behavior or (b) they are unable or unwilling to empathize with sexual assault victims. Support for the actor-observer hypothesis has been provided in a variety of experimental settings (e.g., Gurwitz & Panciera, 1975;Jones, Rock, Shaver, Goethals, & Ward, 1968;Mc-Arthur, 1972;Nisbett, Caputo, Legant, & Maracek, 1973;Schlenker, Bonoma, & Forsyth, 1977) and in a series of studies in which the actor-observer perspective was manipulated experimentally. These ingenious experiments indicated that when observers assumed the actor's visual perspective of an event, they tended to attribute relatively greater responsibility for the actor's behavior to situational determinants of the incident (Arkin & Duval, 1975;Duval & Wicklund, 1973;Storms, 1973;Taylor & Fiske, 1975).…”

Section: Studymentioning

confidence: 99%

Measurement of empathy toward rape victims and rapists.

Deitz¹,

Blackwell²,

Daley³

et al. 1982

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

196

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of the present study was the construction of the Rape Empathy Scale (RES), designed to measure subjects' empathy toward the rape victim and the rapist in a heterosexual rape situation. The results of psychometric analyses of reliability for both a student and juror sample are presented, in addition to evidence of cross-validation on separate student and juror samples. Significant differences between male and female subjects' RES scores were found, as well as differences between scores of women who had experienced a rape situation (rape victims and rape resisters) and women with no previous exposure to rape. RES scores were predictive of both students' and jurors' ratings of defendant guilt, as well as their recommended sentences for the defendant and their attributions of responsibility for the crime. Furthermore, subjects' RES scores were predictive of their social perceptions of the rape victim and defendant, and male jurors' RES scores were negatively correlated with their reported desire to rape a woman. The results are discussed in relation to the low conviction rate for sexual assault cases and the importance of juror selection as a vehicle for increasing the number of just convictions in rape cases.

show abstract

“…Other data show that even highly similar attribution measures may diverge sharply from one another. A striking example of this is seen in a study conducted by Gurwitz and Panciera( 1975). Subjects were run in teacherstudent pairs, and each subject was asked to rate how indicative the students' performance was of how bright they were and how well they generally did at problem solving.…”

Section: Convergent Validitymentioning

confidence: 99%

The actor and the observer: How are their perceptions of causality divergent?

Watson¹

1982

Psychological Bulletin

227

136

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Jones and Nisbett have hypothesized that people generally attribute the actions of others to stable trait dispositions but see their own behavior as relatively more influenced by specific environmental circumstances. This hypothesis is examined and a complete method for its analysis is presented. A review of the literature reveals a strong main effect of attribution type: Both self-and other-raters consistently ascribe more causal importance to traits than to situations. More important, the interaction effect predicted by Jones and Nisbett has been found in many studies using various attribution measures. Further evidence tentatively suggests that this interaction is largely due to the differential tendency of selfand other-raters to attribute causality to the environment, rather than a differential preference for trait attributions. Explanations for the Jones-Nisbett effect are reviewed and evaluated, and methodological problems are discussed.

show abstract

Attributions of freedom by actors and observers.

Cited by 13 publications

References 8 publications

Extrinsic rewards, congruence between dispositions and behaviors, and perceived freedom.

Extrinsic rewards, congruence between dispositions and behaviors, and perceived freedom.

Measurement of empathy toward rape victims and rapists.

The actor and the observer: How are their perceptions of causality divergent?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About