Unfairness begets unfairness: Victim derogation bias in employee ratings

2014 ◽  
Vol 124 (1) ◽  
pp. 34-46 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel P. Skarlicki ◽  
R. Anthony Turner
Keyword(s):  
Victim Derogation

CONTROL AND BELIEF IN THE JUST WORLD: WHAT'S GOOD ALSO CAN BE BAD

1982 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 57-61 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard A. Feinberg ◽  
Amy Powell ◽  
Franklin G. Miller
Keyword(s):  
Learned Helplessness ◽  
Environmental Control ◽  
Sense Of Control ◽  
Just World ◽  
Victim Derogation ◽  
World Hypothesis ◽  
The Relationship

The just world hypothesis provides an explanation for the finding that observers derogate victims. By admitting the appropriateness of a victim's fate., observers may develop a sense of control over the possibility of similar fates. Two experiments investigated the relationship between, the magnitude of motivation for control over the environment and tendency to derogate victims. In Experiment One, situational controllability and uncontrollability were manipulated within a learned helplessness procedure and derogation of a victimized stranger assessed. In Experiment Two, subjects completed the Need for Control and Belief in the Just World scales, measures of the motivation for environmental control and the tendency to derogate victims. The results indicate that motivation and need for control underlie victim derogation.

Victim Derogation and Victim Enhancement as Alternate Routes to System Justification

2005 ◽  
Vol 16 (3) ◽  
pp. 240-246 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aaron C. Kay ◽  
John T. Jost ◽  
Sean Young
Keyword(s):  
Physical Attractiveness ◽  
Causal Link ◽  
Status Quo ◽  
System Justification ◽  
Victim Blaming ◽  
Stereotype Activation ◽  
Victim Derogation ◽  
The Status ◽  
Alternate Routes ◽  
System Threat

Numerous studies have documented the potential for victim-blaming attributions to justify the status quo. Recent work suggests that complementary, victim-enhancing stereotypes may also increase support for existing social arrangements. We seek to reconcile these seemingly contradictory findings by proposing that victim derogation and victim enhancement are alternate routes to system justification, with the preferred route depending on the perception of a causal link between trait and outcome. Derogating “losers” (and lionizing “winners”) on traits (e.g., intelligence) that are causally related to outcomes (e.g., wealth vs. poverty) serves to increase system justification, as does compensating “losers” (and down-grading “winners”) on traits (e.g., physical attractiveness) that are causally unrelated to those outcomes. We provide converging evidence using system-threat and stereotype-activation paradigms.

scholarly journals Victims, Vignettes, and Videos: Meta-Analytic and Experimental Evidence That Emotional Impact Enhances the Derogation of Innocent Victims

2020 ◽  
Vol 24 (3) ◽  
pp. 233-259 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rael J. Dawtry ◽  
Mitchell J. Callan ◽  
Annelie J. Harvey ◽  
Ana I. Gheorghiu
Keyword(s):  
Experimental Evidence ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Emotional Impact ◽  
Experimental Literature ◽  
Theoretical Understanding ◽  
Innocent Victim ◽  
Victim Derogation ◽  
The 1960S

Research during the 1960s found that observers could be moved enough by an innocent victim’s suffering to derogate their character. However, recent research has produced inconsistent evidence for this effect. We conducted the first meta-analysis ( k = 55) of the experimental literature on the victim derogation effect to test the hypothesis that it varies as a function of the emotional impactfulness of the context for observers. We found that studies which employed more impactful contexts (e.g., that were real and vivid) reported larger derogation effects. Emotional impact was, however, confounded by year of appearance, such that older studies reported larger effects and were more impactful. To disentangle the role of emotional impact, in two primary experiments we found that more impactful contexts increased the derogation of an innocent victim. Overall, the findings advance our theoretical understanding of the contexts in which observers are more likely to derogate an innocent victim.

Victim derogation in the Lerner paradigm: Just world or just justification?

1976 ◽  
Vol 33 (6) ◽  
pp. 719-724 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert B. Cialdini ◽  
Douglas T. Kenrick ◽  
James H. Hoerig
Keyword(s):  
Just World ◽  
Victim Derogation

PERCEIVED FREEDOM, ACCIDENT SEVERITY AND EMPATHIC VALUE AS DETERMINANTS OF THE ATTRIBUTION OF RESPONSIBILITY

1976 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 171-176 ◽  
Author(s):  
James M. Gleason ◽  
Victor A. Harris
Keyword(s):  
Factorial Design ◽  
Just World ◽  
Attribution Of Responsibility ◽  
Methodological Issues ◽  
High Severity ◽  
Victim Derogation ◽  
Accident Severity ◽  
Defensive Attribution ◽  
Accident Scenarios

The effects of severity of an accident, perceived freedom of the perpetrator, and empathic value of the victim were examined in a 2 × 2 × 2 factorial design. 192 subjects read detailed accident scenarios and then made judgments as to the responsibility of each of a number of plausibly responsible agents. In line with the hypotheses, subjects attributed more responsibility to the perpetrator under high severity than low severity conditions, and more responsibility under high than low perceived freedom. The hypothesis that more responsibility would be attributed to the perpetrator when the victim was human than when the victim was a dog was not supported. Additionally, there was no clear evidence for victim derogation. The implications of these findings for defensive attribution and just world hypotheses as well as for methodological issues are discussed.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document