Rape and Accident Counterfactuals: Who Might Have Done Otherwise and Would It Have Changed the Outcome?1

Four experiments assessed the blame assigned to the two persons involved in a rape or an auto accident. After reading a description of one of the events, participants were asked to generate different types of counterfactuals in 2 of the studies, and in the other 2 they viewed a videotape of an attorney who suggested to them a specific counterfactual. In the rape context, when changes to the victim's behavior produced a new outcome, blame to the victim was highest and rapist blame was lowest. Counterfactuals where changes in the victim's behaviors did not undo the event resulted in the highest assailant blame and the least victim blame. When the event was an auto accident, blame increased for whichever driver's actions were mentally undone. How attorneys can increase or decrease the blame assigned to their clients depending on the type of counterfactual that they present is discussed.

[1]  M. Burt.  Cultural myths and supports for rape. , 1980, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[2]  Joel T. Johnson.  The Knowledge of What Might have Been , 1986 .

[3]  J. Landman.  Regret and Elation Following Action and Inaction , 1987 .

[4]  A. Milne,et al.  A Curry for Your Thoughts: Empathic Effects on Counterfactual Thinking , 1992 .

[5]  C. Muehlenhard,et al.  Do women sometimes say no when they mean yes? The prevalence and correlates of women's token resistance to sex. , 1988, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[6]  Sheila R. Deitz,et al.  Measurement of empathy toward rape victims and rapists. , 1982, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[7]  C. Macrae.  A Tale of Two Curries: Counterfactual Thinking and Accident-Related Judgments , 1992 .

[8]  N. Branscombe,et al.  Resistance as Stereotype-Inconsistency: Consequences for Judgments of Rape Victims , 1992 .

[9]  G. Wells,et al.  The undoing of scenarios. , 1987 .

[10]  A. Tversky,et al.  The simulation heuristic , 1982 .

[11]  N. Malamuth.  Rape proclivity among males. , 1981 .

[12]  Nyla R. Branscombe,et al.  Mental Simulation and Causal Attribution: When Simulating an Event Does Not Affect Fault Assignment , 1995 .

[13]  James M. Olson,et al.  Outcome Controllability and Counterfactual Thinking , 1995 .

[14]  G. Wells,et al.  Mental Simulation of Causality , 1989 .

[15]  S. Kassin,et al.  Dirty tricks of cross-examination , 1990 .

[16]  Dale T. Miller,et al.  Counterfactual Thinking and Victim Compensation , 1986 .

[17]  Racism, Counterfactual Thinking, and Judgment Severity1 , 1993 .

[18]  Dale T. Miller,et al.  Temporal order and the perceived mutability of events: implications for blame assignment , 1990 .

[19]  D. Hilton,et al.  Knowledge-Based Causal Attribution: The Abnormal Conditions Focus Model , 1986 .

[20]  M. D. Storms,et al.  Videotape and the attribution process: reversing actors' and observers' points of view. , 1973, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[21]  R. Janoff-Bulman,et al.  Cognitive biases in blaming the victim , 1985 .

[22]  Dale T. Miller,et al.  Norm theory: Comparing reality to its alternatives , 1986 .

[23]  C. Brewin,et al.  Coding causal beliefs in natural discourse , 1986 .

[24]  Gün R. Semin,et al.  On the causal information conveyed by different interpersonal verbs: The role of implicit sentence context , 1988 .