心理学
社会心理学
责备
集体责任
发展心理学
神学
哲学
作者
Thomas F. Denson,Brian A. Lickel,Mathew Curtis,Douglas M. Stenstrom,Daniel Robert Ames
标识
DOI:10.1177/1368430206059857
摘要
Two studies investigated the roles of entitativity and essentiality in judgments of collective responsibility. Analyses focused on four group types (i.e. intimacy groups, task groups, social categories, and loose associations). Repeated measures analyses revealed that intimacy groups and task groups were rated highest in entitativity while intimacy groups and social categories were rated highest in essentiality. Correlational analyses revealed that entitativity played a more central role in judgments of collective responsibility for all four group types. However, tests of interaction effects revealed that essentiality moderated the effect of entitativity on blame judgments. Implications of the role of collective responsibility in intergroup relations are discussed.
科研通智能强力驱动
Strongly Powered by AbleSci AI