Innocent cheaters: a new scale measuring the moral disengagement of marital infidelity

Marital infidelity is both socially perceived as immoral and very frequent. This contradiction might be explained through the process of moral disengagement, specifically by the use of certain socially shared moral justifications of infidelity, which consequently foster unfaithful behavior. This research developed and examined the Infidelity Moral Disengagement Scale (IMDS), aiming to capture the strategies of morally legitimizing infidelity used among people engaged in marital relationships. Across two studies (total N = 609 married participants) we investigated the dimensions and psychometric properties of the IMDS. Results showed that the dominant strategies of legitimizing marital infidelity are the diffusion of responsibility, the attribution of blame on the cheated partner, advantageous comparisons with other immoral acts, justifying infidelity through certain benefits, and minimizing its negative consequences. The IMDS emerged as negatively related to moral identity and strongly associated to people’s past infidelity and to their tendency to engage in unfaithful behaviors.

Attributing Blame in Human-Robot Teams with Robots of Differing Appearance

As automation becomes increasingly common in daily life the importance of understanding how we interact with automated systems increases, especially attribution of blame for accidents involving a human-automation team. The current research project looks at how humans attribute blame in an accident involving a human operator and a robot worker and is based on a previous study (Furlough et al., 2019). Participants will read two scenarios detailing an accident while being shown both the operator and robot. The robot’s appearance is manipulated to imply varying levels of automation, ranging from a simple robot to one with a human appearance. Results showed no significant effects, however, this research still has the potential to contribute to the understanding of interactions between humans and automated systems and could inform design in the future to facilitate a positive working environment with robots and humans.

The Power of Conformity in Citizens’ Blame: Evidence from a Survey Experiment

The authors examine whether conformity towards prevailing public opinions and pre-existing blame influences citizens’ attribution of blame for public service failure, by using a between-group experimental design with five groups. Two groups received information cues mentioning different public opinions. Two additional groups received information on pre-existing blame or the absence of such blame. One control group did not receive any information. The empirical analysis reveals that public opinion in favor of blame leads to increased blame attribution, while a contrary public opinion decreases citizens’ blame. Likewise, the expected increase in citizens’ blame resulting from pre-existing blame is supported. However, the absence of blame has no effect. Overall, the experiment supports the impact of conformity on citizens' blame. In addition, the literature on citizens’ blame is extended by utilizing a citizen-centered perspective and taking social psychological theory into account.

Death caused by negligent medical care: Reconsidering the role of gross negligence manslaughter in the aftermath of Bawa-Garba

Gross negligence manslaughter is a well-established common law offence in English jurisdiction. Nevertheless, it remains a troubled area of law. Academic commentators, as well as the Law Commission, have frequently called for reform. We explore this offence through the prism of medical manslaughter and argue that the offence is insufficiently nuanced in certain situations of death caused by gross negligence. This applies particularly to complex professional circumstances where a coalescence of inter-linking factors may converge with disastrous results for the parties concerned. Using the clinical care model as an exemplar, we argue that relentless focus on the offender can result in a disproportionately high level of blame being foisted on an individual. On the basis of decision theory, we suggest that insufficient regard may be given to confounding contextual matters. Failure to address underlying systemic factors may impede wider patient safety initiatives such as professional medical candour and strategies designed for institutional improvements directed at broader societal benefit. We offer an alternative approach based upon principles of fair attribution of blame and transparency. A new statutory offence is suggested for a fault-based standard that is set by law that gives greater prominence to contextual matters. We argue for wider disposal options that include ancillary court orders for rectification of systems failures and more proactive engagement of the coronial process.

Exploring the consequences of COVID-19 on tourist behaviors: perceived travel risk, animosity and intentions to travel

Purpose This paper aims to report on the findings emerging from an international study focused on the COVID-19 pandemic impact on travel attitudes and behavioral intentions . Design/methodology/approach An online survey created with SurveyMonkey was distributed to a sample of 216 international travelers who were at least 18 years of age. Findings The findings suggest that attribution theory (locus of control) may account for international travel. Individuals attributing the spread of COVID-19 to their own countries (internal locus of control) are more likely to travel abroad. Statistically significant differences are observed between various generational cohorts concerning perceived travel risk, domestic and international travel. Originality/value The impact of a health crisis on domestic and international travels conceptualized in a single model is absent from the literature. The authors propose a model to account for the influence of pandemics on tourists’ attitudes and intentions to travel and whether attribution of blame influences travel destination choices (domestic or international).

Investigating country image influences after a product-harm crisis

Purpose Although international product-harm crises have become more common, the influence of the country image (CI) associated with foreign goods in such crises remains under researched. This study aims to investigate the extent to which the CI of a foreign made product influences consumers’ attribution of blame and trust and, ultimately, their future purchase intentions after the product is involved in a crisis. Design/methodology/approach A 2 (country) × 3 (crisis type) quasi experimental design was used, with data collected from Australia (n = 375) and China (n = 401). Findings CI can influence attribution of blame, subsequent levels of trust and likely purchase intentions. Australian and Chinese consumers have different views when it comes to trusting a company or placing blame, depending on the country of origin or the type of crisis. The direct and positive effect of CI on consumer purchase intentions following a product-harm crisis is sequentially mediated by attribution of blame and trust. Trust is the most powerful influence on future purchase intentions in both samples. Research limitations/implications In this research, only one type of crisis response strategy (no comment) was used. Thus, the results of this study must be viewed with caution when considering outcomes relating to other response options. Additionally, the testing was limited to only two samples, focussing on three countries (England, China, Vietnam), and one product context using a hypothetical brand. Further, despite our reasonable sample size (N = 776), the number of respondents represented in each cell would still be considered a limitation overall. Practical implications When developing crisis response strategies, managers should take into account the influence of a positive/negative source CI in driving attribution and trust. To minimize the impact of crisis on future purchasing decisions, organizations can leverage positive biases and mitigate negative ones, aiming to maintain or restore trust as a priority. Originality/value The study provides cross-country understanding about the significant role of CI during a product-harm crisis in relation to subsequent consumers’ blame attribution, their trust in the focal organization and ultimately their future purchase intentions.

Recency effects in the buffering of negative news by corporate social responsibility advertising

PurposeDrawing from the theory of how relevant items are processed in memory when making judgements, this study aims to test for recency effects between CSR advertising and related, negative news on how a company is perceived and the explanatory roles of environmentalism, attribution and both feelings and attitudes towards the advertising itself.Design/methodology/approachThis study uses between-subjects experimental design with pretests.FindingsOrder effects exist, which, when ads and news are similarly influential, evidence a recency effect. The process is explained by both the mediating influence of attribution of blame and the moderation of this influence by attitude towards the environment. Differences between the effectiveness of ads are explained by the mediating influence of attitudes towards and feelings about the ad together with the moderation of this influence by involvement in the ad context.Practical implicationsCorporate social responsibility (CSR) ads should be pretested in the context of related but negative news, and not just on their own, to ensure they can buffer such news. CSR ads can be more effective when following rather than preceding such news and should not be withdrawn if such a crisis occurs.Originality/valueThe research first attempts to explain recency effects theoretically from the influence of CSR ads on negative CSR-related news. It also shows the determining factors in how such effects influence consumers by considering attribution, environmentalism, attitude to the context and attitude and feelings towards CSR ads.

Framing violence in presidential discourse

The paper discusses the characteristics of modern American presidential political rhetoric with special reference to Barack Obama’s speeches in which he addressed the highly publicized killings of black Americans. Three of the analysed speeches contain Obama’s rhetorical reaction to the judicial decisions not to indict the police officers responsible for the killings, while one speech gives his immediate reaction to the mass murder of black parishioners by a white supremacist. The study is based on the discourse-linguistic analysis of attitudinal meanings and their functions, which are conceptualized as evaluative frames. Evaluative frames are used to highlight different kinds of discourse participants through judgments of behaviour, attributions of emotions and evaluations of semiotic phenomena and objects. The theoretical framework for the different categories of evaluative frames is based on the theory of news framing and theory of evaluative language within systemic-functional linguistics. The findings of the analysis show that Obama uses an interplay of positive and negative evaluations of different kinds to transcend racial categorizations and avoid a direct attribution of blame. When he acknowledges the continuing relevance of the racial divide in US society, he often applies evaluative frames in such a way that they unify rather than divide the discourse participants on both sides of the divide.