Do Normative Transgressions Affect Punitive Judgments? An Empirical Test of the Psychoanalytic Scapegoat Hypothesis

Abstract

According to psychoanalytic theory, punitiveness is based on a projection of one's own immoral desires and the moral conflict they cause (scapegoat hypothesis). This hypothesis implies that transgressors impose harsher punishment onto comparable wrongdoers. This effect should be amplified by strength of decision conflict. An alternative hypothesis based on blameavoidance motivation is derived. Participants (N = 291) were asked to indicate whether they would commit an unlawful act in a moral temptation situation and how conflicted they felt in making their decision. Later, they had to judge convicts in criminal cases that were similar to the previous temptation situations. Authoritarianism was assessed as covariate. In contrast to the scapegoat but consistent with the blame-avoidance interpretation, transgressors were more lenient than nontransgressors. Authoritarianism had main effects on punitiveness. Decision conflict was neither directly nor indirectly related to punitiveness. The findings challenge the validity of the scapegoat hypothesis.

A Closer Look at an Eye for an Eye: Laypersons’ Punishment Decisions Are Primarily Driven by Retributive Motives

“…Altemeyer's right-wing authoritarianism (RWA) was found to be more prevalent among people with lower compared to higher education (Altemeyer, 1981;Napier & Jost, 2008;Steiner & Fahrenberg, 2000). Also, RWA is related to higher punitiveness (Carroll, Perkowitz, Lurigio, & Weaver, 1987;Feather, 1996;Gollwitzer, 2004). Thus, it could be expected that authoritarian values and a preference for retribution are more pronounced in a less educated sample.…”

Asymmetrical Effects of Justice Sensitivity Perspectives on Prosocial and Antisocial Behavior

“…In this regard, it is important to distinguish two qualities of guilt: First, guilt can result from immoral thoughts or actions (e.g., Tetlock et al, 2000; see also Gollwitzer, 2004). This form of guilt may be called "actional guilt" (Hoffman, 1984).…”

“…More specifically, we investigated whether the two JS perspectives are related to immoral thoughts and actions in a moral temptation dilemma (cf. Gollwitzer, 2004). 4 Everyday life usually contains an immeasurable number of such temptation situations.…”

Are “We” More Punitive than “Me”? Self-Construal Styles, Justice-Related Attitudes, and Punitive Judgments

“…People also differ in the quantity and quality of punitive sanctions they prefer. A relatively large proportion of this variance in punitive attitudes is attributable to individual differences such as authoritarianism (Feather, 1996(Feather, , 1999Gollwitzer, 2004;Tyler & Weber, 1983), social dominance orientation (Sidanius, Mitchell, Haley, & Navarrete, 2006), need for cognition (Sargent, 2004), norm-internalization (Inkeles & Levinson, 1969), and concerns for society's normative and moral cohesion (Goldberg, Lerner, & Tetlock, 1999;Rucker, Polifroni, Tetlock, & Scott, 2004). …”

“…Another explanation could be that independents are more likely to commit the norm violations we described in our vignettes (which is suggested by the negative correlation between independence and justice sensitivity from a beneficiary's perspective obtained in Study 1). Because people react more leniently toward norm violations that they would also commit themselves (Gollwitzer, 2004), this might explain the negative correlation between independence and punitiveness. These explanations should be addressed in future studies, for example, by experimentally varying the degree to which participants are directly involved in the crime, or by measuring the extent to which participants would feel tempted to commit the act themselves.…”