Cited by 345Social and Intergroup PsychologyBullying, Victimization, and AggressionDeath Anxiety and Social Exclusion

Vicarious retribution: the role of collective blame in intergroup aggression

Lickel, Brian, Miller, Norman, Stenstrom, Douglas M., Denson, Thomas F., Schmader, Toni·2006·Personality and Social Psychology Review

Abstract

We provide a new framework for understanding 1 aspect of aggressive conflict between groups, which we refer to as vicarious retribution. Vicarious retribution occurs when a member of a group commits an act of aggression toward the members of an outgroup for an assault or provocation that had no personal consequences for him or her but which did harm a fellow ingroup member. Furthermore, retribution is often directed at outgroup members who, themselves, were not the direct causal agents in the original attack against the person's ingroup. Thus, retribution is vicarious in that neither the agent of retaliation nor the target of retribution were directly involved in the original event that precipitated the intergroup conflict. We describe how ingroup identification, outgroup entitativity, and other variables, such as group power, influence vicarious retribution. We conclude by considering a variety of conflict reduction strategies in light of this new theoretical framework.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1207/s15327957pspr1004_6

Cites

158 of 158 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The manipulations motivated participants of the Revenge (vs. Control) group to view the involved ingroup member more frequently as a victim during intergroup conflict.

    “The results are consistent with previous findings (Ross and Ward, 1995; Lickel et al., 2006) and suggest that our manipulations motivated participants of the Revenge (vs. Control) group to view the involved ingroup member more frequently as a victim during intergroup conflict.”

    From A neurobiological association of revenge propensity during intergroup conflict (2020) · cites this paper as Lickel et al., 2006

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Lickel, B., Miller, N., Stenstrom, D. M., Denson, T. F., & Schmader, T.
Affiliations
  • University of Southern California (US)
  • University of Arizona (US)
Venue
Personality and Social Psychology Review
Published
2006-11
Volume
10
Issue
4
Pages
372-390
ISSN
  • 1088-8683 (ISSN-L)
  • 1532-7957
OpenAlex
W1989434673
Cited by
345
References
156
Citations by year
2026: 16 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 18 · 2023: 37 · 2022: 25 · 2021: 19 · 2020: 36 · 2019: 22 · 2018: 20 · 2017: 24 · 2016: 12 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 18 · 2013: 14 · 2012: 17
FWCI
3.11
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Personality and Social Psychology Review (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social and Intergroup Psychology
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Bullying, Victimization, and Aggression
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Death Anxiety and Social Exclusion
Keywords
intergroup aggression, intergroup conflict, ingroup identification, group power, retaliation
MeSH terms
Aggression, Cognition, Group Processes, Guilt, Humans, Motivation, Social Behavior, Social Perception

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