Critcher Clayton R, Pizarro David A
Department of Psychology, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853, USA.
Pers Soc Psychol Bull. 2008 Oct;34(10):1357-70. doi: 10.1177/0146167208320557. Epub 2008 Jul 3.
The success of criminal acts can sometimes depend critically on the oversight or negligence of uninvolved bystanders (e.g., someone leaving a first-floor window open). Four studies examined how the contribution of a negligent bystander affects blame for the perpetrator of a crime. Although participants stated that discounting blame for the perpetrator was normatively inappropriate in this context, they expected that others would make this very "error." Instead, across all four studies, bystander negligence amplified ascriptions of perpetrator blame. This amplification occurred because the bad action of the bystander provided an implicit standard of comparison for the perpetrator's act, framing it as more blameworthy. A variety of alternative mechanisms--that bystander negligence altered perceived crime avoidability, prompted spontaneous counterfactualizing, or increased victim empathy--were tested and ruled out. Implications for legal contexts are discussed.
犯罪行为的成功有时可能严重依赖于无关旁观者的疏忽或过失（例如，有人让一楼窗户开着）。四项研究考察了疏忽旁观者的作用如何影响对犯罪者的指责。尽管参与者表示，在这种情况下减少对犯罪者的指责在规范上是不合适的，但他们预计其他人会犯这种“错误”。相反，在所有四项研究中，旁观者的疏忽都加剧了对犯罪者指责的归因。这种加剧的发生是因为旁观者的不良行为为犯罪者的行为提供了一个隐含的比较标准，使其显得更应受指责。各种替代机制——旁观者的疏忽改变了对犯罪可避免性的认知、引发了自发的反事实思考或增强了对受害者的同理心——都经过了测试并被排除。文中还讨论了其对法律情境的影响。
