The Effects of Counterfactual Attacks on Social Judgments

Abstract

Two experiments were conducted to compare the effects of different styles of verbal criticism (factual vs. counterfactual) on the perceptions of target, source, and quality of the attack. Counterfactual attacks resulted in more negative overall judgment of the target and ratings of the target’s morality than either factual attacks or no attack. Counterfactual attacks were also rated more positively than factual attacks, and the source of the counterfactual attack was rated as being less biased against the target. Regression analyses confirmed that the observed effect on overall judgment was mediated by the perceived bias of the source. The greater effectiveness of counterfactual attacks was moderated by awareness of prior hostility of the source of the attack toward the target.

How expert witnesses' counterfactuals influence causal and responsibility attributions of mock jurors and expert judges

“…Previous research carried out in the political domain had investigated the conditions under which counterfactual attacks and defences influence the evaluation of the actor focused on in the counterfactuals (Catellani & Bertolotti, 2014b). In the context of judicial decision making we have now shown that counterfactuals embedded in communication function as a powerful cue in recipients' causal and responsibility attribution process, highlighting the perceived role of the actor on whom they are focused.…”

“…In our research, counterfactuals were produced by an allegedly neutral and authoritative source, namely an expert witness. Past research carried out in the political field has found that the influence of counterfactual communication can diminish or even disappear when the counterfactual source is perceived as unreliable (Catellani & Bertolotti, 2014b). This might be the case also in the judicial field.…”

“…We know much less about how the use of counterfactuals in communication may influence causal and responsibility attributions, in everyday and judicial contexts. Research carried out in the political domain has shown that counterfactual communication has subtle but significant effects on the way individuals think about past events and evaluate people involved in them (see Catellani & Bertolotti, 2014a, 2014b; Markman & Tetlock, 2000; McMullen & Markman, 2000). Some studies indicate that this may be also the case in the judicial context, as counterfactuals used in the presentation of court cases can affect jurors' causal and responsibility attributions (e.g., Catellani, Alberici, & Milesi, 2004).…”

“…Early research (Tal‐Or, Boninger, Poran, & Gleicher, 2004) found that persuasive messages including counterfactual statements were more effective than messages not including counterfactual statements, but such effect persisted in the long term only when participants were prompted to generate themselves counterfactual thoughts. Subsequent studies analysed the use of counterfactuals in impression formation (Wong, 2010) and impression management (Bertolotti, Catellani, Douglas, & Sutton, 2013; Catellani & Bertolotti, 2014a, 2014b), showing that providing individuals with a counterfactual statement regarding an actor can effectively influence their judgements on the actor, the reconstructed event and even the source of the counterfactual statement itself. For instance, upward counterfactuals (e.g., “If he/she had acted in a different way, things would be better now”) can be an effective form of implicit criticism, as they subtly imply that the actions of a chosen actor are causally linked to the outcome, and that the actor is therefore responsible for it (Catellani & Bertolotti, 2014b).…”

The Effects of Counterfactual Attacks on the Morality and Leadership of Different Professionals

“…Counterfactual attacks have an enhanced rhetorical potential in this regard, as they offer the possibility of putting the outcome of someone’s behavior in a negative light just by comparing it with a hypothetical more positive condition, rather than disputing its actual negativity. Counterfactual attacks can affect social judgments through two possible pathways (Catellani & Bertolotti, 2014a, 2015). The first pathway is content-specific and is based on how counterfactuals affect recipients’ perception of past events and the actors involved in them.…”