The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Mediating Effects of Blame Attributions on Feelings of Anger
Abstract
Two structural equation models are presented to examine the relationship between anger and blame. In the first model, attributions of blame mediate the relationship between feelings of anger and attributions concerning the provoker's intentions to harm, his or her justification in harming, and the amount of harm done. In the second model, anger and blame exist in a reciprocal relationship. The self-reports of 158 individuals concerning an incident in which they had been harmed were analyzed using LISREL VIII. Both models showed satisfactory fit to the data; however, on the basis of theory and past research, the second model is proposed as more acceptable. Additional analyses demonstrated that interactional injustice was the most often reported type of injustice and that men were more likely to be reported as the offender than women. Implications of the research are discussed and suggestions for future research are presented.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Beyond valence: Toward a model of emotion-specific influences on judgement and choice
Lerner, J. S., & Keltner, D. (2000) · Cognition & Emotion · doi:10.1080/026999300402763 · Cited by 3,171
Lerner, J. S., Li, Y., Valdesolo, P., & Kassam, K. S. (2015) · Annual Review of Psychology · doi:10.1146/annurev-psych-010213-115043 · Cited by 2,913
Emotion, regulation, and moral development
Eisenberg, N. (2000) · Annual Review of Psychology · doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.51.1.665 · Cited by 2,422
Accounting for the effects of accountability.
Lerner, J. S., & Tetlock, P. E. (1999) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.125.2.255 · Cited by 2,383
Malle, B. F., Guglielmo, S., & Monroe, A. E. (2014) · Psychological Inquiry · doi:10.1080/1047840x.2014.877340 · Cited by 632
Bridging emotion theory and neurobiology through dynamic systems modeling
Lewis, M. D. (2005) · Behavioral and Brain Sciences · doi:10.1017/s0140525x0500004x · Cited by 618
Marcus, G. E. (2000) · Annual Review of Political Science · doi:10.1146/annurev.polisci.3.1.221 · Cited by 468
Testing an attribution-of-blame model of judgments of injustice
Mikula, G. (2003) · European Journal of Social Psychology · doi:10.1002/ejsp.184 · Cited by 118
Filipowicz, A., Barsade, S., & Melwani, S. (2011) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/a0023545 · Cited by 108
Huber, M., Van Boven, L., Park, B., & Pizzi, W. T. (2015) · PLOS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0139193 · Cited by 31
Emotional Reactivity and Police Expertise in Use-of-Force Decision-Making
Ta, V. P., Lande, B., & Suss, J. (2021) · Journal of Police and Criminal Psychology · doi:10.1007/s11896-020-09428-5 · Cited by 17
Metadata
- Authors
- Quigley, B. M., & Tedeschi, J. T.
- Venue
- Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 1996-12
- Volume
- 22
- Issue
- 12
- Pages
- 1280-1288
- ISSN
- 0146-1672 (ISSN-L)
- 1552-7433
- OpenAlex
- W2076676874
- Cited by
- 213
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 4.35
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
