Someone to blame: When identifying a victim decreases helping

By Tehila Kogut. 2011

127 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Cognitive Neuroscience, Social Psychology, Sociology and Political Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/05dabbedf30544190064de720da111e53431d806

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Cognitive Neuroscience

1. Laura R. Welp
2. Danit Ein-Gar
3. Liat Levontin
4. Thomas Hugh Feeley
5. Seyoung Lee
6. Christina M. Brown
7. E. Bates
8. Silke Meyer

In Social Psychology

1. Thomas Hugh Feeley
2. Seyoung Lee
3. Laura R. Welp
4. Danit Ein-Gar
5. Liat Levontin
6. Christina M. Brown
7. E. Bates
8. Silke Meyer

In Sociology and Political Science

1. Thomas Hugh Feeley
2. Seyoung Lee
3. E. Bates
4. Laura R. Welp
5. Danit Ein-Gar
6. Liat Levontin
7. Christina M. Brown
8. Silke Meyer

Citations in the corpus

• Self-compassion, empathy, and helping intentions (2014, background): “Blaming the victim usually decreases helping (Gruder et al., 1978; Kogut, 2011), yet people high in self-compassion both blamed and helped more.”
• Still blaming the victim of intimate partner violence? Women’s narratives of victim desistance and redemption when seeking support (2016, background): “Empathy and support seem to be reserved for victims who are seen as innocent and vulnerable in the process of their victimization (Carpenter, 2005; Dignan, 2005; Kogut, 2011) and public perceptions of innocence tend to vary greatly with different types of victims and victimization (Dunn, 2010; Fatta”
• The identifiable victim effect: a meta-analytic review (2016, methodology): “If the victims in a given study were underprivileged or hungry children (e.g., Lesner & Rasmussen, 2014) or homeless people (e.g., Kogut, 2011; Study 4), it was coded as “poverty,” and if the victims were people suffering from an illness such as HIV/AIDS or cancer (e.g., Erlandsson et al., 2015) or ”
• Giving from a distance: Putting the charitable organization at the center of the donation appeal (2013, background): “Fourth, in cases when it is possible to blame the victims for their current situation, identification of a single target enhances negative perceptions of the victim and decreases donations (Kogut, 2011).”
• “No one would ever believe me”: An exploration of the impact of intimate partner violence victimization on men. (2019, background): “…then more likely to be trivialised and less likely to be deserving of help or assistance (Gracia, (2014); if this is perceived by a victim then it indicates a lack of sympathy that will create a psychological distance between them and the observer (e.g., service provider, police, GP; Kogut, 2011).”