@article{ref1,
title="Accounting for evil and cruelty: is to explain to condone?",
journal="Personality and social psychology review",
year="1999",
author="Miller, A. G. and Gordon, A. K. and Buddie, A. M.",
volume="3",
number="3",
pages="254-268",
abstract="Analysts of evil and violence express the concern that to explain harmdoing may result in a condoning attitude toward perpetrators. An examination of research relevant to this hypothesis suggests that there are a variety of cognitive and affective processes that may produce a relatively condoning attitude toward perpetrators as a result of explaining their actions. Evidence from 3 exploratory studies supported the exonerating effects of explanations. Participants generating explicit explanations of harmdoing displayed a more condoning attitude toward pelpetrators than did those forming impressions of perpetrators without first explaining the acts. Participants reading social-psychological explanations of harmdoing also judged the researcher to be more condoning of perpetrators than those reading dispositional explanations of the same behavior. Implications of these findings are discussed.<p /><p>Language: en</p>",
language="en",
issn="1088-8683",
doi="10.1207/s15327957pspr0303_8",
url="http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15327957pspr0303_8"
}