The relationship between intent, consequences, the dangerousness of the victim, and blame: The case of self-defense

Psychology, Crime and Law

Volumn 7, Issue 1, 2001, Pages 57-69

  Hermand, Daniéle ^a   Mullet, Etienne ^b,d   Tomera, Patricia ^c   Touzart, Virginie ^c  

^a UNIVERSITÉ DE NANTES   (France)

^b PSL RESEARCH UNIVERSITY   (France)

^c UNIV LILLE   (France)

^d NONE   (France)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 7044253719     PISSN: 1068316X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/10683160108401783     Document Type: Article

References (18)

1. Alicke, M. D. and Davis, T. L. (1989). The role of a posteriori information in judgments of blame and sanction. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 25, 362-377.
2. Alicke, M. D., Davis, T. L., and Pezzo, M . V. (1994). A posteriori adjustment of a priori decision criteria. Social Cognition, 12, 281-308.
3. Anderson, N. H. (1991a). Psychodynamics of everyday life: Blaming and avoiding blame. In N. H. Anderson (Ed.), Contributions to information integration theory: Vol. II (pp. 243-275). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
4. Anderson, N. H. (1991b). Moral-social development. In N. H. Anderson (Ed.), Contributions to information integration theory: Vol. III (pp. 137-187). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
5. Enzle, M. E. and Hawkins, W. L. (1992). A priori actor negligence mediates a posteriori outcome effects on moral judgment. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 28, 169-185.
6. Grueneich, R. (1982). The development of children's integration rules for making moral judgments. Child Development, 53, 887-894.
7. Hermand, D., Mullet, E. and Prieur, C. (1992). Moral judgment and consequences integration. An information integration approach. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 7, 587-595.
8. Hommers, W. (1983). Die Entwicklungpsychologie der Delikts- und Geschäftsfähigkeit. Berlin: Hogrefe.
9. Hommers, W. and Anderson, N. H. (1985). Recompense as a factor in assigned punishment. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 3, 75-86.
10. Hommers, W. and Anderson, N. H. (1988). Algebraic schemes in legal thought and in everyday morality. In H. Wegener, F. Lösel, and J. Haisch (Eds.), Criminal Behavior and the Justice System. New York: Springer-Verlag.
11. Hommers, W. and Anderson, N. H. (1991). Moral algebra of harm and recompense. In N. H. Anderson (Ed.), Contributions to information integration theory: Vol. II (pp. 101-141) Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
12. Leon, M. (1980). Integration of intent and consequences information in children's moral judgments. In F. Wilkening, J. Becker, and T. Trabasso (Eds.), The integration of information by children. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
13. Leon, M. (1982). Rules in children's moral judgments: Integration of intent, damage, and rationale information. Developmental Psychology, 18, 835-842.
14. Leon, M. (1984). Rules mothers and sons use to integrate intent and damage information in their moral judgments. Child Development, 55, 2106-2113.
15. Przygotzki, N. and Mullet, E. (1993). Relationships between punishment, damage, and intent to harm in the incarcerated: An information integration approach. Social Behavior and Personality, 21, 93-102.
16. Przygotzki, N. and Mullet, E. (1997). Moral judgment and aging. European Review of Applied Psychology, 47, 15-21.
17. Surber, C. F. (1977). Developmental processes in social inference: Averaging of intentions and consequences in moral judgment. Developmental Psychology, 13, 654-665.
18. Surber, C. F. (1982). Separable effects of motives, consequences, and presentation order on children's moral judgments. Developmental Psychology, 18, 257-266.