IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/sagope/v10y2020i4p2158244020970942.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Causality and Blame Judgments of Negative Side Effects of Actions May Differ for Different Institutional Domains

Author

Listed:
  • Inna F. Deviatko
  • Kirill A. Gavrilov

Abstract

Cognitive factors are known to influence lay assessments of causality and blame for negative side effects of intentional actions but specific social determinants of such assessments remain relatively unexplored. In a full-factorial, intraindividual experiment using two blocks of analogous vignettes constructed for two particular institutional action domains (“medical†and “corporate dress code†), we tested the propositions that causality and blame judgments differ between (a) domains and depend on (b) the type of action originator; (c) the type of damage; and (d) the “remoteness†of damage from the originator. Our data demonstrate a significant difference between two institutional action domains: actors in “medical†-related vignettes are generally estimated to be more causally effective and blameworthy than actors in “dress code†–related vignettes. In addition to the pronounced main effects of institutional domain as a factor influencing cause and blame judgments, we revealed few significant interaction effects of the latter with other experimental factors used for vignettes construction.

Suggested Citation

  • Inna F. Deviatko & Kirill A. Gavrilov, 2020. "Causality and Blame Judgments of Negative Side Effects of Actions May Differ for Different Institutional Domains," SAGE Open, , vol. 10(4), pages 21582440209, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:sagope:v:10:y:2020:i:4:p:2158244020970942
    DOI: 10.1177/2158244020970942
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/2158244020970942
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/2158244020970942?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. David Dequech, 2008. "Logics of Justification and Logics of Action," Journal of Economic Issues, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 42(2), pages 527-535, June.
    2. Karl-Dieter Opp, 2002. "When Do Norms Emerge by Human Design and When by the Unintended Consequences of Human Action?," Rationality and Society, , vol. 14(2), pages 131-158, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Chien Liu, 2020. "A theory of norm collapse," Rationality and Society, , vol. 32(2), pages 119-143, May.
    2. Sini Forssell & Leena Lankoski, 2017. "Navigating the tensions and agreements in alternative food and sustainability: a convention theoretical perspective on alternative food retail," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 34(3), pages 513-527, September.
    3. Karl-Dieter Opp, 2001. "How do norms emerge? An outline of a theory," Mind & Society: Cognitive Studies in Economics and Social Sciences, Springer;Fondazione Rosselli, vol. 2(1), pages 101-128, March.
    4. Chien Liu, 2021. "A theory of sexual revolution: explaining the collapse of the norm of premarital abstinence," Mind & Society: Cognitive Studies in Economics and Social Sciences, Springer;Fondazione Rosselli, vol. 20(1), pages 41-58, June.
    5. Francesca Bortolami & Luigi Mittone, 2009. "Does Participating in a Collective Decision Affect the Levels of Contributions Provided? An Experimental Investigation," CEEL Working Papers 0902, Cognitive and Experimental Economics Laboratory, Department of Economics, University of Trento, Italia.
    6. Christel Dumas & Céline Louche, 2016. "Collective beliefs for responsible investment," Post-Print hal-01183744, HAL.
    7. Xile Yin & Siyu Chen & Dahui Li & Feng Zhang, 2021. "Social norms for fairness and board voting behavior: An experimental investigation," Corporate Governance: An International Review, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(2), pages 110-133, March.
    8. Marc Keuschnigg & Tobias Wolbring, 2015. "Disorder, social capital, and norm violation: Three field experiments on the broken windows thesis," Rationality and Society, , vol. 27(1), pages 96-126, February.
    9. Christine Horne, 2007. "Explaining Norm Enforcement," Rationality and Society, , vol. 19(2), pages 139-170, May.
    10. José M Galán & Maciej M Łatek & Seyed M Mussavi Rizi, 2011. "Axelrod's Metanorm Games on Networks," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 6(5), pages 1-11, May.
    11. Lacetera, Nicola & Macis, Mario, 2010. "Do all material incentives for pro-social activities backfire? The response to cash and non-cash incentives for blood donations," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 31(4), pages 738-748, August.
    12. Christian Scheve & Daniel Moldt & Julia Fix & Rolf Luede, 2006. "My agents love to conform: Norms and emotion in the micro-macro link," Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, Springer, vol. 12(2), pages 81-100, October.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:sagope:v:10:y:2020:i:4:p:2158244020970942. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.