Relation between victims’ posttransgression responses and monitoring on transgressors’ welfare trade-off ratios

We have a pervasive drive to maintain positive and lasting relationships and the extent to which we do this within a framework of mutual concern for each other’s welfare is crucial to the social bonding process. The purpose of this research was to test why and when victims’ posttransgression respons...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Evolutionary behavioral sciences 2024-10
Main Authors: Struthers, C. Ward, Shoikhedbrod, Ariel, Guilfoyle, Joshua R., Li, Jingyuan, Millett, Grace, Davison, Brianna, Rebrov, Dmytro O., AlMakadma, Ola, Dekel, Gal
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Aggressive Behavior
Crime Victims
Female
Forgiveness
Human
Male
Monitoring
Responses
Retaliation
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:We have a pervasive drive to maintain positive and lasting relationships and the extent to which we do this within a framework of mutual concern for each other’s welfare is crucial to the social bonding process. The purpose of this research was to test why and when victims’ posttransgression responses (PTRs) (i.e., revenge, forgiveness, and grudge holding), relate to transgressors’ welfare trade-off ratios (WTRs) toward victims, which were operationalized as transgressors’ rumination about their wrongdoing, worry about transgressing again, and apology to the victim. We theorized that transgressors’ perception of victims’ PTRs to seek revenge, forgive, or hold a grudge would increase transgressors’ WTR toward victims depending on whether transgressors’ PTRs were monitored or not by victims. We also theorized that transgressors’ cost/benefit analysis would explain why the associations between victims’ PTRs and transgressors’ WTR are moderated by victims’ monitoring. Overall, we predicted that the association between victims’ revenge/grudge and transgressors’ WTR toward victims would be explained by perceived costs when transgressors’ future actions could be monitored. In contrast, we predicted that the relation between victims’ forgiveness and transgressors’ WTR toward victims would be explained by perceived benefits when transgressors’ future actions could not be monitored. Three studies ( Ns = 212, 232, 344) confirmed predictions derived from our theorizing. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) (Source: journal abstract)
ISSN:2330-2925
2330-2933
DOI:10.1037/ebs0000365