{"title":"施暴者对其后悔的和合理的攻击行为的民间解释。","authors":"Randy J McCarthy, Jared P Wilson","doi":"10.1080/00224545.2023.2186830","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>When people explain why they behaved aggressively, they can refer to their thought process that led to their aggressive behavior - so-called <i>reason</i> explanations - or to other factors that preceded their thought process - so-called <i>causal history of reasons explanations</i>. People's choice of what mode of explanation they give might be affected by whether they want to distance themselves (or not) from their past aggressive behaviors. To test these ideas, participants in the current study (<i>N</i> = 429) either recalled an aggressive behavior they regret or an aggressive behavior they believe was justified. Participants then explained why they behaved aggressively. Mostly, people gave reason explanations for their aggressive behaviors, which is consistent with past research on how people explain intentional behaviors. Further, and as predicted, participants who explained behaviors they believe were justified gave (relatively) more reason explanations and participants who explained behaviors they regretted gave (relatively) more causal history of reasons explanations. These findings are consistent with the idea that participants adjust their explanations to either provide a rationale for, or to distance themselves from, their past aggressive behaviors.</p>","PeriodicalId":48205,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Social Psychology","volume":" ","pages":"809-822"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Perpetrators' folk explanations of their regretted and justified aggressive behaviors.\",\"authors\":\"Randy J McCarthy, Jared P Wilson\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/00224545.2023.2186830\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>When people explain why they behaved aggressively, they can refer to their thought process that led to their aggressive behavior - so-called <i>reason</i> explanations - or to other factors that preceded their thought process - so-called <i>causal history of reasons explanations</i>. People's choice of what mode of explanation they give might be affected by whether they want to distance themselves (or not) from their past aggressive behaviors. To test these ideas, participants in the current study (<i>N</i> = 429) either recalled an aggressive behavior they regret or an aggressive behavior they believe was justified. Participants then explained why they behaved aggressively. Mostly, people gave reason explanations for their aggressive behaviors, which is consistent with past research on how people explain intentional behaviors. Further, and as predicted, participants who explained behaviors they believe were justified gave (relatively) more reason explanations and participants who explained behaviors they regretted gave (relatively) more causal history of reasons explanations. These findings are consistent with the idea that participants adjust their explanations to either provide a rationale for, or to distance themselves from, their past aggressive behaviors.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48205,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Social Psychology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"809-822\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Social Psychology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/00224545.2023.2186830\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/3/7 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Social Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00224545.2023.2186830","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/3/7 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
Perpetrators' folk explanations of their regretted and justified aggressive behaviors.
When people explain why they behaved aggressively, they can refer to their thought process that led to their aggressive behavior - so-called reason explanations - or to other factors that preceded their thought process - so-called causal history of reasons explanations. People's choice of what mode of explanation they give might be affected by whether they want to distance themselves (or not) from their past aggressive behaviors. To test these ideas, participants in the current study (N = 429) either recalled an aggressive behavior they regret or an aggressive behavior they believe was justified. Participants then explained why they behaved aggressively. Mostly, people gave reason explanations for their aggressive behaviors, which is consistent with past research on how people explain intentional behaviors. Further, and as predicted, participants who explained behaviors they believe were justified gave (relatively) more reason explanations and participants who explained behaviors they regretted gave (relatively) more causal history of reasons explanations. These findings are consistent with the idea that participants adjust their explanations to either provide a rationale for, or to distance themselves from, their past aggressive behaviors.
期刊介绍:
Since John Dewey and Carl Murchison founded it in 1929, The Journal of Social Psychology has published original empirical research in all areas of basic and applied social psychology. Most articles report laboratory or field research in core areas of social and organizational psychology including the self, attribution theory, attitudes, social influence, consumer behavior, decision making, groups and teams, sterotypes and discrimination, interpersonal attraction, prosocial behavior, aggression, organizational behavior, leadership, and cross-cultural studies. Academic experts review all articles to ensure that they meet high standards.