When Does Intoxication Help or Hurt My Case? The Role of Emotionality in the Use of Intoxication as a Discounting Cue

Abstract

Many would contend that drinking to the point of intoxication is maladaptive. Further, almost all would agree that criminal behavior is maladaptive. Thus, one might assume that someone who commits a crime while intoxicated would be judged more harshly by others, given that such a perpetrator enacted two maladaptive behaviors. Yet, across two studies, including one analysis of archival criminal sentencing data, we demonstrate that this is often not the case. Critically, the type of crime committed influences whether intoxication mitigates versus exacerbates censure from others. For crimes predominately believed to be driven by emotion, intoxication discounts dispositional attributions and reduces perceived culpability. However, for other actions, intoxication has no effect, and can sometimes increase culpability. We conclude by discussing the important theoretical, practical, and policy implications of these findings, in addition to why a link between certain crimes and intoxication may enable abuse to the self and others.

Cite this work

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

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 3 citations exist upstream.

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