Ideological and Attributional Boundaries on Public Compassion: Reactions to Individuals and Communities Affected by a Natural Disaster
Ideological and Attributional Boundaries on Public Compassion: Reactions to Individuals and Communities Affected by a Natural Disaster
复制标题
公众同情心的意识形态和归因界限：对受自然灾害影响的个人和社区的反应
DOI：
10.1177/0146167299025007003
复制
发表时间：
1999
影响因子：
4
通讯作者：
L. Skitka
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
L. Skitka
本研究探讨了人们为何需要公共援助的基于意识形态的归因 (a) 即使在外部无法控制的需求原因的背景下也会出现； (b) 对不同层次的分析进行概括，例如不同形式的援助以及不同类型的索赔人（个人或团体）；并探讨了(c)承诺的改革对于帮助那些对其困境负有个人责任的人的意愿的作用。即使在自然灾害的背景下，帮助意愿上的意识形态和归因差异也出现了。自由主义者在对人道主义援助做出判断时，倾向于暂缓归因分析的通常后果，甚至帮助那些不负责任的人；保守派则没有。自由派和保守派都更支持旨在满足主要需求而不是次要需求的援助，援助取决于未来的改革，以及对社区的帮助而不是对个人的帮助。
The present study explored whether ideologically based attributions for why people need public assistance (a) emerge even in the context of an external-uncontrollable cause of need; (b) generalize across different levels of analysis, for example, across different forms of assistance, as well as across different types of claimants (individuals or groups); and explored (c) the role of promised reform on willingness to help those with personal responsibility for their plight. Ideological and attributional differences in willingness to help emerged even in the context of a natural disaster. Liberals tended to suspend the usual consequences of attributional analysis when making judgments about humanitarian aid by helping even the irresponsible; conservatives did not. Liberals and conservatives alike were more supportive of aid designed to meet primary than secondary needs, aid made contingent on future reform, and of help for communities over individuals.