The latest fresh point and you will dataset appear in the

After that next blog post, members completed an extra temporary survey which included a comparable activities due to the fact basic into the comparison of the culprit. A final area alarmed participants’ quantity of governmental attention, political thinking-placement toward ten-point remaining–best continuum, intercourse, ages, section of house and studies.

Members were at random assigned to certainly one of six fresh criteria derived about 2 (perpetrator’s sex) ? step three (repair strategy) anywhere between members factorial build.

All of the measures did within study were according to the ethical conditions of your own national search panel and with the 1964 Helsinki endments.

Assessment of governmental actor

Participants said its internationally thoughts into fictitious politician into the an excellent 10-part level (1 = completely negative so you can 10 = entirely confident) twice, once in the T1 (post-scandal) and once during the T2 (post–protective response). The efficacy of the defensive tactic inside restoring character try grabbed through the improvement in testing of the protagonist.

Testing of politician’s communality and you can agency both before and after their or the lady justification of scandal

Brand new participants examined the newest scandal perpetrator to the a good 5-area size ranging from step 1 (not at all) so you’re able to 5 (very much) twice, immediately following following the scandal (T1) and when following perpetrator’s defensive response (T2). Participants rated this new culprit with the about three adjectives for every on local hookup Pittsburgh KS the communality dimensions (honest, practical and empathetic) and company dimension (calculated, skilled and you can good; elizabeth.g., Bauer 2017 ). The indicator built on brand new indicate issues hit satisfactory reliability: ? communality article-scandal = 0.80; ? communality article-reason = 0.74; ? department post-scandal = 0.63; ? department article-justification = 0.67.


Preliminary regression analyses for instance the politician’s attractiveness, respondents’ sex, respondents’ political direction, respondents’ degrees of demand for government and you can respondents’ expectations concerning comparative honesty of women and you will boys did not give any head nor interaction effect on the latest created parameters. As a result, they won’t be considered for the then analyses.

We tested H1 using a 3 (type of defensive tactic) ? 2 (perpetrator’s gender) ANOVA on the global attitude toward the politician after his/her defensive reaction including the previous attitude (T1) as a covariate. The hypothesised two-way interaction between the independent variables proved to be the only significant effect, F (2, 185) = 6.06; p = 0.003; ? 2 p = 0.06 (Figure 1 ). Further inspection of this interaction revealed that the ‘diffusion of responsibility with accusation of another person’ was effective only when used by the man, simple slope = 0.11, SE = 0.04, 95% CI [0.03, 0.19], whereas the ‘excuses with claims of mitigating circumstances’ was effective only when used by the woman, simple slope = 0.09, SE = 0.04, 95% CI [0.00, 0.17]. Finally, contrary to our expectations, ‘mortification with request for forgiveness’ did not vary its efficacy as a function of the politician’s gender, simple slope = 0.00, SE = 0.04, 95% CI [–0.08, 0.08].

Imply international ideas with the an effective scandal culprit due to the fact a purpose of his/the girl intercourse plus the communicative strategy accustomed defend him/herself.

Regarding H2, the ANOVA including the agentic and communal dimensions measured at T2 as a repeated factor (and those measured at T1 as covariates) revealed the main effect of the repeated factor, F (1, 184) = 9.13, p = 0.003, ? 2 p = 0.05, signalling that the defensive reactions were globally more effective in improving the perpetrator agentic traits (M = 0.30, SD = 0.17) than the communal ones (M = 0.27, SD = 0.18). This analysis also elicited the two-way interaction between the type of defensive tactic and the repeated factor, F (1, 184) = 9.13, p 2 p = 0.14, indicating that the ‘diffusion of responsibility’ improved the evaluation of the perpetrator on agentic traits more than the other defensive tactics, that did not differ from each other at the LSD post-hoc test, whereas none of the tactics differed from each other as for the efficacy in improving the perceived perpetrator communality. In addition, the two-way interaction between the gender of the politician and the repeated factor, F (1, 184) = , p 2 p = 0.15 showed that the defensive reactions, irrespective of the type, improved the communality traits of the female politician (M = 0.31, SD = 0.19) more than those of the male one (M = 0.23; SD = 0.17), simple slope = 0.06, SE = 0.02, 95% CI [0.02, 0.10], whereas they were equally effective in improving the agentic traits of the male politician (M = 0.32, SD = 0.18) and those of the female one (M = 0.28, SD = 0.16), simple slope = 0.04; SE = 0.02, 95% CI [–0.01, 0.08].