Causal and Moral Responsibility of Victims of Rape and Robbery

Suresh Kanekar · Nirmala J. P. Pinto · Deepa Mazumdar

72 citations0/0 files storedJournal of Applied Social Psychology

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Sexual Assault and Victimization Studies Social and Intergroup Psychology Psychology of Moral and Emotional Judgment

Abstract

Four experimental studies of attribution in a criminal situation used a 24 ANOVA design with three common independent variables, namely, type of crime, time of crime, and victim's prior experience of crime, all three manipulated through a passage describing an incident of crime involving a male criminal and a female victim, and one common dependent measure which was length of imprisonment recommended for the criminal. The fourth independent variable was subject's sex in the first two experiments and instructionally manipulated female subject's involvement (objective or identifying female subject) in the last two experiments. The second dependent measure was fault attributed to the victim in the first and third experiments and perceived likelihood of crime in the second and fourth experiments. The subjects were undergraduate students of the University of Bombay, 15 per cell in each experiment. Female subjects were more punitive toward the criminal than male subjects, especially in the case of rape, and the rapist received a longer sentence than the robber, especially from female subjects. Identifying female subjects tended to recommend a longer sentence than objective female subjects. Female subjects attributed less fault to the victim and perceived greater likelihood of crime than male subjects and identifying female subjects attributed somewhat less fault to the victim than did objective female subjects. The robbery victim was attributed more fault than the rape victim. Whereas previous experience of similar victimization increased attributed victim's fault, a late hour enhanced both attributed victim's fault and perceived likelihood of crime. These findings are discussed with respect to a theoretical distinction between causal and moral responsibility as represented by the likellhood and fault measures, respectively.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 72 citations exist upstream.

References

1978Just world research and the attribution process: Looking back and ahead.1979Characterological versus behavioral self-blame: Inquiries into depression and rape.1978Attitudes toward rape: A comparative analysis of police, rapists, crisis counselors, and citizens.1978Attitudes toward rape: A comparative analysis of police, rapists, crisis counselors, and citizens.1982Measurement of empathy toward rape victims and rapists.1976Social Perception of the Victim's Causal Role in Rape: An Exploratory Examination of Four Factors 1976Penalties for Rape as a Function of Victim Provocativeness, Damage, and Resistance 1979Effects of rape victim resistance, assault outcome, and sex of observer on attributions about rape

Cited by

1998Are computers scapegoats? Attributions of responsibility in human–computer interaction 1991Social Psychological Issues in the Study of Rape 1991The Role of Sexual Provocativeness, Rape History, and Observer Gender in Perceptions of Blame in Sexual Assault 2015Blame attributions in sexual crimes: Effects of belief in a just world and victim behavior

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.