Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2023 Jun;41(3):303-315.
doi: 10.1521/soco.2023.41.3.303.

Asymmetric Causal Attributions to Environmental Influences for Prosocial Versus Antisocial Behavior

Matthew S Lebowitz  1 , Kathryn Tabb  2 , Paul S Appelbaum  1
Affiliations

Asymmetric Causal Attributions to Environmental Influences for Prosocial Versus Antisocial Behavior

Matthew S Lebowitz et al. Soc Cogn. 2023 Jun.

Abstract

Several recent studies have explored how people may favor different explanations for others' behavior depending on the moral or evaluative valence of the behavior in question. This research tested whether people would be less willing to believe that a person's environment played a role in causing her to exhibit antisocial (as compared to prosocial) behavior. In three experiments, participants read a description of a person engaging in either antisocial or prosocial behavior. Participants were less willing to endorse environmental causes of antisocial (versus prosocial) behavior when the environmental influence in question was witnessing others behaving similarly, either during childhood (Experiment 1) or recently (Experiment 2), or being directly encouraged by others to engage in the behavior described (Experiment 3). These results could be relevant to understanding why people resist attributing wrongdoing to causes outside of individual control in some cases.

Keywords: Causal Attribution; Motivated Reasoning; Social Cognition.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
Mean environmental attribution ratings, by condition, in Experiment 1. Means are collapsed across other independent variables because the additional experimental manipulations did not significantly moderate the antisocial-prosocial asymmetry in endorsement of environmental attributions. Error bars represent ±1 SE of the mean.
Figure 2.
Figure 2.
Mean environmental attribution ratings, by condition, in Experiment 2. Means are collapsed across other independent variables because the additional experimental manipulations did not significantly moderate the antisocial-prosocial asymmetry in endorsement of environmental attributions. Error bars represent ±1 SE of the mean.
Figure 3.
Figure 3.
Mean environmental attribution ratings, by condition, in Experiment 3. Means are collapsed across other independent variables because the additional experimental manipulations did not significantly moderate the antisocial-prosocial asymmetry in endorsement of environmental attributions. Error bars represent ±1 SE of the mean.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

References

    1. Alicke MD (2000). Culpable control and the psychology of blame. Psychol Bull, 126(4), 556–574. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.126.4.556 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Buhrmester M, Kwang T, & Gosling SD (2011). Amazon’s mechanical turk: A new source of inexpensive, yet high-quality, data? Perspectives on Psychological Science, 6(1), 3–5. doi:Doi 10.1177/1745691610393980 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Clark CJ (2022). The blame efficiency hypothesis: An evolutionary framework to resolve rationalist and intuitionist theories of moral condemnation. Advances in Experimental Philosophy of Free Will and Responsibility, 27.
    1. Clark CJ, Luguri JB, Ditto PH, Knobe J, Shariff AF, & Baumeister RF (2014). Free to punish: A motivated account of free will belief. J Pers Soc Psychol, 106(4), 501–513. doi:10.1037/a0035880 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Jayaratne TE, Gelman SA, Feldbaum M, Sheldon JP, Petty EM, & Kardia SLR (2009). The perennial debate: Nature, nurture, or choice? Black and white americans’ explanations for individual differences. Review of General Psychology, 13(1), 24–33. doi:10.1037/a0014227 - DOI - PMC - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources