Glossary
Defensive Attribution Hypothesis
What is the Defensive Attribution Hypothesis?
The defensive attribution hypothesis proposes that self-protective motives influence judgments of responsibility for harmful events. Observers may consider, implicitly or explicitly, whether a similar event could happen to them or whether they could be blamed in a similar situation.
Similarity and responsibility
Burger’s meta-analysis of accident research found a weak overall tendency to assign more responsibility for severe accidents. When observers were personally and situationally similar to the accident perpetrator, greater severity was associated with less assigned responsibility; dissimilarity showed the opposite pattern.
Example of defensive attribution
For example, an observer who could imagine making the same driving error might judge a driver differently from an observer who sees that driver as unlike themselves. The different judgments would not, by themselves, reveal either observer’s motive.
Defensive attribution and victim blaming
Assigning responsibility for causing an accident is different from blaming the person harmed by it. The findings above do not establish that identifying with a victim always increases blame. To judge a particular event fairly, examine what happened, the choices available, and the constraints people faced.
The just-world fallacy concerns assuming that people generally receive the outcomes they deserve.