Exculpating Victims and the Reversal of Hindsight Bias

Dagmar Stahlberg (), Sabine Sczesny () and Stefan Schwarz ()
Additional contact information
Dagmar Stahlberg: Lehrstuhl fuer Sozialpsychologie, Sonderforschungsbereich 504, Postal: Seminargebaeude A5, D-68131 Mannheim
Sabine Sczesny: Lehrstuhl fuer Sozialpsychologie der Universitaet Mannheim, Postal: Seminargebaeude A5, D-68131 Mannheim
Stefan Schwarz: Sonderforschungsbereich 504, Postal: L 13, 15, D-68131 Mannheim

No 99-70, Sonderforschungsbereich 504 Publications from Sonderforschungsbereich 504, Universität Mannheim, Sonderforschungsbereich 504, University of Mannheim

Abstract: This experiment examines the role of the hindsight bias and of motivational forces such as the motive to believe in a just world as possible causes of the derogation of victims effect in the context of rape. The hindsight bias is the tendency of people to falsely believe that they would have predicted the outcome of an event once the outcome is known. Participants read descriptions of an interaction between a man and a woman that ended with one of four possible outcomes: The woman was raped with very severe consequences for her future life vs. rape with only minor consequences for her future life vs. no rape (assailant was forced to retreat by the strong defense of the victim) vs. no outcome information. To test motivational predictions the hindsight bias and the derogation effect were analyzed as a consequence of the sex of participants, the seriousness of the consequences of the rape, the belief in a just world and the acceptance of rape myths. Results supported the assumption that derogation effects are at least partly driven by hindsight bias and that motivational processes work via the hindsight bias. However, in this study we did not find a classical hindsight bias but a reversed hindsight bias: Especially female participants in the severe consequences of rape condition and those participants who did not accept rape myths rated the likelihood of rape in the rape outcome condition as smaller than participants in the no outcome information control group. They also derogated the victim less than participants in the no information control group. These effects were interpreted in terms of self-serving or in-group serving functions of the hindsight bias. Finally no support was found for the assumption that derogation effects are driven by the motive to believe in a just world.

Pages: 34 pages
Date: 1999-06-23
Note: Financial Support from the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft, SFB 504, at the University of Mannheim, is gratefully acknowledged.
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (1)

There are no downloads for this item, see the EconPapers FAQ for hints about obtaining it.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:xrs:sfbmaa:99-70

Ordering information: This working paper can be ordered from

Access Statistics for this paper

More papers in Sonderforschungsbereich 504 Publications from Sonderforschungsbereich 504, Universität Mannheim Contact information at EDIRC., Sonderforschungsbereich 504, University of Mannheim
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Carsten Schmidt ( this e-mail address is bad, please contact ).