In the current research, the author investigates the influence of social categorizations on retributive emotions (e.g., anger) and punishment intentions when people evaluate suspected offenders as independent observers. It is argued that information that guilt is certain or uncertain (i.e., guilt probability) has different consequences for retributive reactions to ingroup and outgroup suspects. In correspondence with predictions, results of four experiments showed that people reacted more negatively to ingroup than outgroup suspects when guilt was certain but that people reacted more negatively to outgroup than ingroup suspects when guilt was uncertain. It is concluded that guilt probability moderates the influence of social categorizations on people’s retributive reactions to suspected offenders.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Abrams, D., Marques, J. M., Bown, N., & Henson, M. (2000). Pro-norm and anti-norm deviance within and between groups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78, 906-912.
2.
Boeckmann, R. J., & Tyler, T. R. (1997). Commonsense justice and inclusion within the moral community: When do people receive procedural protections from others? Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 3, 362-380.
3.
Branscombe, N. R., Wann, D. L., Noel, J. G., & Coleman, J. (1993). In-group or out-group extremity: Importance of the threatened social identity. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 19, 381-388.
4.
Brewer, M. B. (1979). In-group bias in the minimal intergroup situation: A cognitive-motivational analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 86, 307-324.
5.
Carlsmith, K. M., Darley, J. M., & Robinson, P. H. (2002). Why do we punish? Deterrence and just deserts as motives for punishment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83, 284-299.
6.
Castano, E., Paladino, M.-P., Coull, A., & Yzerbyt, V. Y. (2002). Protecting the ingroup stereotype: Ingroup identification and the management of deviant ingroup members. British Journal of Social Psychology, 41, 365-385.
7.
Darley, J. M. (2002). Just punishments: Research on retributional justice. In M. Ross & D. T. Miller (Eds.), The justice motive in everyday life (pp. 314-333). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
8.
Darley, J. M., Carlsmith, K. M., & Robinson, P. H. (2000). Incapacitation and just deserts as motives for punishment. Law and Human Behavior, 24, 659-683.
9.
Darley, J. M., & Pittman, T. S. (2003). The psychology of compensatory and retributive justice. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 7, 324-336.
10.
Doosje, B., Branscombe, N. R., Spears, R.,&Manstead, A. S. R. (1998). Guilty by association: When one’s group has a negative history. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 872-886.
11.
Eidelman, S., & Biernat, M. (2003). Derogating black sheep: Individual or group protection? Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 39, 602-609.
12.
Feather, N. T. (1998). Reactions to penalties for offenses committed by the police and public citizens: Testing a social-cognitive process model of retributive justice. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 528-544.
13.
Finkel, N. J., & Sales, B. D. (1997). Commonsense justice: Old roots, germinant ground, and new shoots. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 3, 227-241.
14.
Folger, R. (2001). Fairness as deonance. In S. Gilliland, D. Steiner, & D. Skarlicki (Eds.), Theoretical and cultural perspectives on organisational justice (pp. 3-33). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishers.
15.
Goldberg, J. H., Lerner, J. S., & Tetlock, P. E. (1999). Rage and reason: The psychology of the intuitive prosecutor. European Journal of Social Psychology, 29, 781-795.
16.
Graham, S., Weiner, B., & Zucker, G. S. (1997). An attributional analysis of punishment goals and public reactions to O. J. Simpson. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 23, 331-346.
17.
Haidt, J. (2001). The emotional dog and its rational tail: A social intuitionist approach to moral judgments. Psychological Review, 108, 814-834.
18.
Hogan, R., & Emler, N. (1981). Retributive justice. In M. J. Lerner & S. Lerner (Eds.), The justice motive in social behavior (pp. 125-144). New York: Plenum.
19.
Hogg, M. A., & Abrams, D. (1988). Social identifications: A social psychology of intergroup relations and group processes. London: Routledge.
20.
Kerr, N. L., Hymes, R. W., Anderson, A. B., & Weathers, J. E. (1995). Defendant-juror similarity and mock juror judgments. Law and Human Behavior, 19, 545-567.
21.
Lind, E. A., & Tyler, T. R. (1988). The social psychology of procedural justice. New York: Plenum.
22.
Marques, J. M., Abrams, D., Paez, D., & Martinez-Taboada, C. (1998). The role of categorization and in-group norms in judgments of groups and their members. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 976-988.
23.
Marques, J. M., Abrams, D., & Serôdio, R. G. (2001). Being better by being right: Subjective group dynamics and derogation of in-group deviants when generic norms are undermined. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81, 436-447.
24.
Marques, J. M., & Paez, D. (1994). The “black sheep effect”: Social categorization, rejection of ingroup deviates, and perception of group variability. In W. Stroebe & M. Hewstone (Eds.), European review of social psychology (Vol. 5, pp. 37-68). New York: John Wiley.
25.
Marques, J. M., Yzerbyt, V. Y., & Leyens, J. -P. (1988). The black sheep effect: Judgmental extremity towards ingroup members as a function of group identification. European Journal of Social Psychology, 18, 1-16.
26.
Miller, D., & Vidmar, N. (1981). The social psychology of punishment reactions. In M. J. Lerner & S. Lerner (Eds.), The justice motive in social behavior (pp. 145-172). New York: Plenum.
27.
Rucker, D. D., Polifroni, M., Tetlock, P. E., & Scott, A. L. (2004). On the assignment of punishment: The impact of general societal threat and the moderating role of severity. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 30, 673-684.
28.
Sargent, M. J., & Bradfield, A. L. (2004). Race and information processing in criminal trials: Does the defendant’s race affect how the facts are evaluated? Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 30, 995-1008.
29.
Skitka, L. J., & Crosby, F. J. (2003). Trends in the social psychological study of justice. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 7, 282-285.
30.
Smith, H. J., Tyler, T. R., Huo, Y. J., Ortiz, D. J., & Lind, E. A. (1998). The self-relevant implications of the group-value model: Group membership, self-worth, and treatment quality. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 34, 470-493.
31.
Sommers, S. R., & Ellsworth, P. C. (2000). Race in the courtroom: Perceptions of guilt and dispositional attributions. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26, 1367-1379.
32.
Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In W. G. Austin & S. Worchel (Eds.), The social psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 33-47). Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole.
33.
Tyler, T. R., & Lind, E. A. (1992). A relational model of authority in groups. In M. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 25, pp. 115-292). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
34.
Van den Bos, K. (2003). On the subjective quality of social justice: The role of affect as information in the psychology of justice judgments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85, 482-498.
35.
van Prooijen, J.-W., Van den Bos, K., & Wilke, H. A. M. (2004a). Group belongingness and procedural justice: Social inclusion and exclusion by peers affects the psychology of voice. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87, 66-79.
36.
van Prooijen, J.-W., Van den Bos, K., & Wilke, H. A. M. (2004b). The role of standing in the psychology of procedural justice: Towards theoretical integration. In W. Stroebe & M. Hewstone (Eds.), European review of social psychology (Vol. 15, pp. 33-58). East Sussex, UK: Psychology Press.
37.
vanProoijen, J-W., VandenBos, K.,&Wilke, H. A. M. (in press). Procedural justice and intragroup status: Knowing where we stand in a group enhances reactions to procedures. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology.
38.
Vidmar, N. (2002). Retributive justice: Its social context. In M. Ross & D. T. Miller (Eds.), The justice motive in everyday life (pp. 291-313). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
39.
Wenzel, M. (2004). Restoring justice after transgressions. Paper presented at the 10th International Society for Justice Research conference, Regina, Canada.
