Punitive responses to crime have been linked to a relatively low need for cognition (NFC). Sargent's (2004) findings suggest that this relationship is due to a relatively complex attributional system, employed by high-NFC individuals, which permits them to recognize potential external or situational causes of crime. However, high-NFC individuals may also be more likely to engage in counterfactual thinking, which has been linked to greater judgments of blame and responsibility. Three studies examine the relationship between trait and state NFC and punitiveness in light of counterfactual thinking. Results suggest that the ease of generating upward counterfactuals in response to an unfortunate crime moderates the NFC-punitiveness relationship, such that high-NFC individuals are less punitive than low-NFC individuals only when counterfactual thoughts are relatively difficult to generate. These findings are discussed in light of punishment theory and their possible implications with regard to the legal system.
Aiken, L.S., & West, S.G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
2.
Branscombe, N.R., Owen, S., Garstka, T.A., & Coleman, J. (1996). Rape and accident counterfactuals: Who might have done otherwise and would it have changed the outcome? Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 26, 1042-1067.
3.
Branscombe, N.R., Wohl, M.J.A., Owen, S., Allison, J.A., & N'gbala, A. (2003). Counterfactual thinking, blame assignment, and well-being in rape victims. Basic and Applied Social Psychology , 25, 265-273.
4.
Briñol, P., Petty, R.E., & Tormala, Z.L. (2006). The malleable meaning of subjective ease. Psychological Science, 17, 200-206.
5.
Cacioppo, J.T., & Petty, R.E. (1982). The need for cognition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 42, 116-131.
6.
Cacioppo, J.T., Petty, R.E., Feinstein, J.A., & Jarvis, W.B. (1996). Dispositional differences in cognitive motivation: The life and times of individuals varying in need for cognition. Psychological Bulletin, 119, 197-253.
7.
Cacioppo, J.T., Petty, R.E., & Kao, C.F. (1984). The efficient assessment of need for cognition . Journal of Personality Assessment, 48, 306-307.
8.
Carlsmith, K.M., Darley, J.M., & Robinson, P.H. (2002). Why do we punish? Deterrence and just deserts as motives for punishment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83, 284-299.
9.
Cohen, J., & Cohen, P. (1983). Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
10.
Creyer, E.H., & Gürhan, Z. (1997). Who's to blame? Counterfactual reasoning and the assignment of blame. Psychology and Marketing, 14, 209-222.
11.
Dijksterhuis, A., Spears, R., Postmes, T., Stapel, D.A., Koomen, W., van Knippenberg, A., et al. (1998). Seeing one thing and doing another: Contrast effects in automatic behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 862-871.
12.
Fazio, R.H. (1995). Attitudes as object-evaluation associations: Determinants, consequences, and correlates of attitude accessibility. In R. E. Petty & J. A. Krosnick (Eds.), Attitude strength: Antecedents and consequences (pp. 247-282). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
13.
Fleeson, W., Malanos, A.B., & Achille, N.M. (2002). An intraindividual process approach to the relationship between extraversion and positive affect: Is acting extraverted as "good" as being extraverted? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 83, 1409-1422.
14.
Fletcher, G.J.O., Danilovics, P., Fernandez, G., Peterson, D., & Reeder, G.D. (1986). Attributional complexity: An individual differences measure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 875-884.
15.
Fraser, C.O. (2001). Was it my fault? Effects of counterfactual mutation focus and self-presentation strategy. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 31, 1076-1095.
16.
Gallup Organization, Inc. (2008). Sourcebook of criminal justice statistics online: Attitudes toward the death penalty for persons convicted of murder, 2007. Retrieved June 23, 2008, from http://www.albany.edu/sourcebook/pdf/t2522007.pdf
17.
Girotto, V., Ferrante, D., Pighin, S., & Gonzalez, M. (2007). Postdecisional counterfactual thinking by actors and readers. Psychological Science, 18, 510-515.
18.
Gleicher, F., Kost, K.A., Baker, S.M., Strathman, A.J., Richman, S.A., & Sherman, S.J. (1990). The role of counterfactual thinking in judgments of affect. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 16, 284-295.
19.
Goldinger, S.D., Kleider, H.M., Azuma, T., & Beike, D. (2003). "Blaming the victim" under memory load. Psychological Science, 14, 81-85.
20.
Hirt, E.R., Kardes, F.R., & Markman, K.D. (2004). Activating a mental simulation mind-set through generation of alternatives: Implications for debiasing in related and unrelated domains. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 40, 374-383.
Johnson, J.T. (1986). The knowledge of what might have been: Affective and attributional consequences of near outcomes. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 12, 51-62.
23.
Kahneman, D., & Miller, D.T. (1986). Norm theory: Comparing reality to its alternatives . Psychological Review, 93, 136-153.
24.
Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1982). The simulation heuristic. In D. Kahneman, P. Slovic, & A. Tversky (Eds.), Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases (pp. 201-208). New York: Cambridge University Press.
25.
Kasimatis, M., & Wells, G.L. (1995). Individual differences in counterfactual thinking . In N. J. Roese & J. M. Olson (Eds.), What might have been: The social psychology of counterfactual thinking (pp. 81-101). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
26.
Landman, J. (1987). Regret and elation following action and inaction: Affective responses to positive versus negative outcomes. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 13, 524-536.
27.
Markman, K.D., Gavanski, I., Sherman, S.J., & McMullen, M.N. (1993). The mental simulation of better and worse possible worlds. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 29, 87-109.
28.
Martin, L.L. (1986). Set/reset: Use and disuse of concepts in impression formation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 493-504.
29.
Medvec, V.H., Madey, S.F., & Gilovich, T. (1995). When less is more: Counterfactual thinking and satisfaction among Olympic medalists. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 603-610.
30.
Miller, D.T., & Gunasegaram, S. (1990). Temporal order and the perceived mutability of events: Implications for blame assignment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59, 1111-1118.
31.
Petrocelli, J.V., & Percy, E.J. (2008, May). Counterfactual thought confidence: Questioning the likelihood of what might have been. Paper presented at the 80th annual meeting of the Midwestern Psychological Association, Chicago, IL.
32.
Petrocelli, J.V., Tormala, Z.L., & Rucker, D.D. (2007). Unpacking attitude certainty: Attitude clarity and attitude correctness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92, 30-41.
33.
Petty, R.E., Briñol, P., & Tormala, Z.L. (2002). Thought confidence as a determinant of persuasion: The self-validation hypothesis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82, 722-741.
34.
Petty, R.E., & Brock, T.C. (1979). Effects of Barnum personality assessments on cognitive behavior. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 47, 201-203.
35.
Petty, R.E., & Jarvis, B.G. (1996). An individual difference perspective on assessing cognitive processes. In N. Schwarz & S. Sudman (Eds.), Answering questions: Methodology for determining cognitive and communicative processes in survey research (pp. 221-257). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
36.
Robbennolt, J.K., & Sobus, M.S. (1997). An integration of hindsight bias and counterfactual thinking: Decision-making and drug courier profiles. Law and Human Behavior, 21, 539-560.
37.
Roese, N.J., & Olson, J.M. (1995). What might have been: The social psychology of counterfactual thinking. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
38.
Rye, M.S., Cahoon, M.B., Ali, R.S., & Daftary, T. (2008). Development and validation of the Counterfactual Thinking for Negative Events Scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 90, 261-269.
39.
Salancik, G.R., & Conway, M. (1975). Attitude inferences from salient and relevant cognitive content about behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 32, 829-840.
40.
Sanna, L.J., Schwarz, N., & Stocker, S.L. (2002). When debiasing backfires: Accessible content and accessibility experiences in debiasing hindsight. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 28, 497-502.
41.
Sargent, M.J. (2004). Less thought, more punishment: Need for cognition predicts support for punitive responses to crime. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 30, 1485-1493.
42.
Schwarz, N. (1998). Accessible content and accessibility experiences: The interplay of declarative and experiential information in judgment. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 2, 87-99.
43.
Schwarz, N., Bless, H., Strack, F., Klumpp, G., Rittenauer-Schatka, H., & Simons, A. (1991). Ease of retrieval as information: Another look at the availability heuristic. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61, 195-202.
44.
Sherman, S.J., Beike, D.R., & Ryalls, K.R. (1999). Dual-processing accounts of inconsistencies in responses to general versus specific cases. In S. Chaiken & Y. Trope (Eds.), Dual-process theories in social psychology (pp. 203-227). New York: Guilford.
45.
Spellman, B.A., & Kincannon, A. (2001). The relation between counterfactual ("but for") and causal reasoning: Experimental findings and implications for jurors' decisions . Law and Contemporary Problems, 64, 241-264.
46.
Tormala, Z.L., Falces, C., Briñol, P., & Petty, R.E. (2007). Ease of retrieval effects in social judgment: The role of unrequested cognitions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93, 143-157.
47.
Tormala, Z.L., Petty, R.E., & Briñol, P. (2002). Ease of retrieval effects in persuasion: A self-validation analysis. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28, 1700-1712.
48.
Wänke, M., & Bless, H. (2000). The effects of subjective ease of retrieval on attitudinal judgments: The moderating role of processing motivation. In H. Bless & J. P. Forgas (Eds.), The message within: The role of subjective experience in social cognition and behavior (pp. 143-161). Philadelphia: Taylor & Francis.
49.
Wegener, D.T., & Petty, R.E. (1995). Flexible correction processes in social judgment: The role of naïve theories in corrections for perceived bias. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68, 38-51.
50.
Wiener, R.L., Gaborit, M., Pritchard, C.C., McDonough, E.M., Staebler, C.R., Wiley, D.C., et al. (1994). Counterfactual thinking in mock juror assessments of negligence: A preliminary investigation. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 12, 89-102.
51.
Winkielman, P., & Schwarz, N. (2001). How pleasant was your childhood? Beliefs about memory shape inferences from experienced difficulty of recall. Psychological Science, 12, 176-179.
