Effect of age group membership on the perception and attribution of responsibility

Abstract

Purpose: The purpose of this research was to investigate the effects on attribution of responsibility (AR) of the following four variables: (1) age group of membership of the subject (S), (2) intent of the protagonist, (3) quality of outcome (positive or negative), and (4) intensity of outcome (high or low). In addition, this study investigated using nonsense forms to represent the protagonist in each standard attribution of responsibility (AR) story. Subjects: A total of 100 female Ss were selected randomly with the restriction that 20 Ss be obtained from each of the following five age groups: 9-15 years, 16-30 years, 31-45 years, 46-60 years, and 61 years and above. Tasks: The specific tasks performed by each S area indicated below: (1) S rated each of 21 nonsense forms on 12 semantic differential scale; (2) attributed responsibility to the protagonist (Perry) in each AR story; and (3) S selected one nonsense form to represent Perry for each specific AR story. Variables: The dependent variable was the attribution of responsibility (AR) rating of Perry for the AR stories. Level of responsibility, outcome quality, and outcome intensity were varied in the AR stimulus stories prepared by Sulzer in 1966. The nonsense forms were 21 forms prepared according to Method 1 and 3 by Attneave and Arnoult (1956). The twelve semantic differential scales included ten bi-polar adjectives used by Elliott and Tannenbaum (1963) and two new scales. Hypotheses: The four hypotheses are listed below. 1. There will be significant differences in attribution of responsibility (AR) ratings as a function of the age group membership of S. 2. Some nonsense forms will be selected more often than would be expected by chance depending on the AR story level, quality of outcome (positive or negative), and intensity of outcome (high or low). 3. Significant differences between age groups are expected for the semantic differential ratings of the nonsense forms. 4. Attribution of responsibility (AR) ratings will be significantly affected b the sotry level, quality of outcome, and intensity of outcome. Conclusions: Empirical support was found for each of the four hypotheses. It was concluded that the method of requiring the selection of nonsense forms to represent the protagonists in the AR stories is a worthwhile approach and, in the future, could be developed in to a useful diagnostic technique.