Causal deviance and the ascription of intent and blame

References

• Alicke, M. D. (1992). Culpable causation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63, 368–378.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Alicke, M. D. (2000). Culpable control and the psychology of blame. Psychological Bulletin, 126, 556–574.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Alicke, M. D. (2008). Blaming badly. Journal of Cognition and Culture, 8, 179–186. Special Issue—On Folk Conceptions of Mind, Agency, and Morality.
   Google Scholar
• Alicke, M. D., Rogers, R., & Taylor, S. (2018). What is Blame and why do we love it? In K. Gray & J. Graham (Eds.), Atlas of moral psychology (pp. 382–390). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
   Google Scholar
• Alicke, M. D., & Davis, T. L. (1989). The role of a posteriori victim information in judgments of blame and sanction. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 25, 362–377.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Alicke, M. D., Buckingham, J. T., Zell, E., & Davis, T. L. (2008). Culpable control and counterfactual reasoning in the psychology of blame. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 34, 1371–1381.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Alicke, M. D., Mandel, D. R., Hilton, D. J., Gerstenberg, T., & Lagnado, D. A. (2015). Causal conceptions in social explanation and moral evaluation: A historical tour. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 10(6), 790-812. doi:10.1177/1745691615601888
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Alicke, M. D., & Rose, D. (2012). Culpable control and causal deviance. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 6(10), 723–735.
   Google Scholar
• Alicke, M. D., Rose, D., & Bloom, D. (2011). Causation, norm violation, and culpable control. The Journal of Philosophy, 108(12), 670–696.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Alicke, M. D., & Zell, E. (2009). Social attractiveness and blame. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 39(9), 2089–2105.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ames, D. L., & Fiske, S. T. (2013). Intentional harms are worse, even when they’re not. Psychological Science, 24(9), 1755–1762.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ames, D. L., & Fiske, S. T. (2015). Perceived intent motivates people to magnify observed harms. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 112(12), 3599–3605.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beebe, J. R., & Buckwalter, W. (2010). The epistemic side-effect effect. Mind & Language, 25(4), 474–498.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beebe, J. R., & Jensen, M. (2012). Surprising connections between knowledge and actions: The robustness of the epistemic side-effect effect. Philosophical Psychology, 25(5), 689–715.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Burns, R. (1786). Poems, chiefly in the Scottish dialect. Kilmarnock: John Wilson.
   Google Scholar
• Carnes vs. Thompson (1932). Supreme Court of Missouri.
   Google Scholar
• Fincham, F. D., & Jaspers, J. M. (1980). Attribution of responsibility: From man the scientist to man as lawyer. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 13, pp. 81–138). New York, NY: Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• Fincham, F. D., & Shultz, T. R. (1981). Intervening causation and the mitigation of responsibility for harm. British Journal of Social Psychology, 20(2), 113–120.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Frankfurt, H. G. (1969). Alternate possibilities and moral responsibility. Journal of Philosophy, 66(23), 829–839.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gray, K., & Graham, J. (Eds.). (2018). Atlas of moral psychology. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
   Google Scholar
• Guglielmo, S., Monroe, A. E., & Malle, B. F. (2009). At the heart of morality lies folk psychology. Inquiry, 52(5), 449–466.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Haidt, J. (2001). The emotional dog and its rational tail: A social intuitionist approach to moral judgment. Psychological Review, 108(4), 814–834.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hayes, A. F. (2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hume, D. (1748/2007). An enquiry concerning human understanding. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kelley, H. H. (1971). Attribution in social interaction. New York, NY: General Learning Press.
   Google Scholar
• Knobe, J. (2003). Intentional action and side effects in ordinary language. Analysis, 63, 190–193.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Knobe, J. (2010). Person as scientist, person as moralist. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 33(04), 315–329.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Lagnado, D. A., & Channon, S. (2008). Judgments of cause and blame: The effects of intentionality and foreseeability. Cognition, 108, 754–770.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Malle, B. F., Guglielmo, S., & Monroe, A. E. (2014). A theory of blame. Psychological Inquiry, 25(2), 147–186.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Malle, B. F., & Knobe, J. (1997). The folk concept of intentionality. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 33, 101–121.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mazzocco, P. J., & Alicke, M. D. (2004). On the robustness of outcome bias: No constraint by prior culpability. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 26, 131–146.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mele, A. (2001). Acting intentionally: Probing folk intuitions. In B. F. Malle, L. J. Moses, & D. A. Baldwin (Eds.), Intentions and intentionality (pp. 27–43). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Miller, J. S., & Feltz, A. (2011). Frankfurt and the folk: An experimental investigation of Frankfurt-style cases. Consciousness and Cognition, 20, 401–414.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nadelhoffer, T. (2004). The Butler problem revisited. Analysis, 64(3), 277–284.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nadelhoffer, T. (2005). Skill, luck, control, and intentional action. Philosophical Psychology, 18(3), 341–352.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nadelhoffer, T. (2006). Desire, foresight, intentions, and intentional actions: Probing folk intuitions. Journal of Cognition and Culture, 6(1), 133–157.
   Google Scholar
• Nahmias, E., Morris, S., Nadelhoffer, T., & Turner 1, J. (2005). Surveying freedom: Folk intuitions about free will and moral responsibility. Philosophical Psychology, 18(5), 561–584.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pizarro, D., Uhlmann, E., & Salovey, P. (2003). Asymmetry in judgments of moral blame and praise: The role of perceived metadesires. Psychological Science, 14(3), 267–272.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pizarro, D. A., Uhlmann, E., & Bloom, P. (2003). Causal deviance and the attribution of moral responsibility. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 39(6), 653–660.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roese, N. J. (1997). Counterfactual thinking. Psychological Bulletin, 121(1), 133–148.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Saks, M. J., & Spellman, B. A. (2016). The psychological foundations of evidence law. NY: NYU Press.
   Google Scholar
• Samaha, J. (2017). Criminal Law (12th ed.). Boston, MA: Cengage Learning.
   Google Scholar
• Shaver, K. G. (1985). The attribution of blame: Causality, responsibility, and blameworthiness. New York: Springer-Verlag.
   Google Scholar
• Shaw, M. E., & Sulzer, J. L. (1964). An empirical test of Heider’s levels in attribution of responsibility. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 69(1), 39–47.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shultz, T. R., Schleifer, M., & Altman, I. (1981). Judgments of causation, responsibility, and punishment in cases of harm-doing. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science, 13(3), 238.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Woolfolk, R. L., Doris, J. M., & Darley, J. M. (2006). Identification, situational constraint, and social cognition: Studies in the attribution of moral responsibility. Cognition, 100(2), 283–301.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar