Abstract
For many years, researchers assumed that the public was indifferent to corporate wrongdoing, but recent surveys have discovered evidence to the contrary. Taking insights from these data a step further, this study employed an experimental design to examine whether people responded differently to corporate versus individual wrongdoers. We varied the identity of the central actor in a scenario involving harm to workers. Half the respondents were informed that a corporation caused the harm; the remainder were told that an individual did so. Respondents applied a higher standard of responsibility to the corporate actor. For identical actions, the corporation was judged as more reckless and more morally wrong than the individual. Respondents' judgments of the greater recklessness of the corporation led them to recommend higher civil and criminal penalties against the corporation.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Black, D. (1987). Compensation and the social structure of misfortune.Law and Society Review, 21, 563–584.
Bray, R. M., & Kerr, N. L. (1982). Methodological considerations in the study of the psychology of the courtroom. In N. L. Kerr & R. M. Bray (Eds.),The psychology of the courtroom (pp. 287–323). New York: Academic Press.
Chin, A., & Peterson, M. (1985).Deep pockets, empty pockets: Who wins in Cook County jury trials. Santa Monica, California: The Rand Corporation.
Clinard, M. B., & Yeager, P. C. (1980).Corporate crime. New York: Free Press.
Cook, W. W. (1893).The corporation problem: The public phases of corporations, their uses, abuses..., New York: G. P. Putnam.
Cullen, F. T., Maakestad, W. J., & Cavender, G. (1987).Corporate crime under attack. Cincinnati: Anderson Publishing Co.
Cullen, F. T., Mathers, R. A., Clark, G. A., & Cullen, J. B. (1983). Public support for punishing white-collar crime: Blaming the victim revisited?Journal of Criminal Justice, 11, 481–493.
Darley, J. M., & Latane, B. (1968). Bystander intervention in emergencies: Diffusion of responsibility.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 8, 377–383.
Deschamps, J.-C. (1984). The social psychology of intergroup relations and categorical differentiation. In H. Tajfel (Ed.),The social dimension: European developments in social psychology (Vol. 2) (pp. 541–559). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Ermann, M. D., & Lundman, R. (1982).Corporate deviance. New York: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston.
Epstein, R. A., Gregory, C. O., & Kalven, H., Jr. (1984).Cases and materials on torts (4th ed.). Boston: Little, Brown.
Geis, G. (1973). Deterring corporate crime. In R. Nader and M. J. Green (Eds.),Corporate power in America (pp. 246–258), New York: Viking.
Gibbons, D. (1969). Crime and punishment: A study of social attitudes.Social Forces, 47, 391–417.
Grabosky, P. N., Braithwaite, J., & Wilson, P. R. (1987). The myth of community tolerance to white-collar crime.Australian and New Zealand Journal of Criminology, 20, 33–44.
Hammitt, J. K., Carroll, S. J., & Relles, D. A. (1985). Tort standards and jury decisions.Journal of Legal Studies, 14, 751–762.
Hans, V. P., & Vidmar, N. (1986).Judging the jury. New York: Plenum Press.
Jacoby, J. (1980).The American prosecutor: A search for identity. Lexington, Massachusetts: D. C. Heath.
Kaplan, J., & Weisberg, R. (1986).Criminar law: Cases and materials. Boston: Little, Brown.
Kalven, H., & Zeisel, H. (1966).The American jury. Boston: Little, Brown.
Latane, B. (1981). The psychology of social impact.American Psychologist, 36, 343–356.
Lind, E. A., & Tyler, T. R. (1988).The social psychology of procedural justice. New York: Plenum.
McCauley, C., & Jacques, S. (1979). The popularity of conspiracy theories of Presidential assassination: A Bayesian analysis.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 637–644.
McCormick, A. E., Jr. (1977). Rule enforcement and moral indignation: Some observations on the effects of criminal antitrust convictions upon societal reaction processes.Social Problems, 25, 30–39.
Newman, D. J. (1957). Public attitudes toward a form of white collar crime.Social Problems, 4, 228–232.
Opinion Roundup. (1986, November/December).Public Opinion, pp. 21–28.
Pritchard, D. (1986). Homicide and bargained justice: The agenda-setting effect of crime news on prosecutors.Public Opinion Quarterly, 50, 143–159.
Roper, B. W., & Miller, T. A. W. (1985). Americans take stock of business.Public Opinion, 8(4), 12–15.
Ross, E. A. (1907, January), The criminaloid.The Atlantic Monthly, 99, pp. 44–50. In G. Geis & R. F. Meier (Eds.),White collar crime (rev. ed.) (pp. 29–37). New York: Free Press, 1977.
Rossi, P. H., Waite, E., Bose, C. E., & Berk, R. (1974). The seriousness of crimes: Normative structure and individual differences.American Sociological Review, 39, 224–237.
Schrager, L. S., & Short, J. F. (1978). Toward a sociology of organizational crime.Social Problems, 25, 407–419.
Sellin, T., & Wolfgang, M. E. (1964).The measurement of delinquency. New York: Wiley.
Shaver, K. G. (1985).The attribution of blame. New York: Springer-Verlag.
Sutherland, E. H. (1983).White-collar crime: The uncut version, New Haven: Yale University Press. (Original publication in 1949.White-collar crime. New York: Holt.)
Swigert, V. L., & Farrell, R. A. (1980–1981). Corporate homicide: Definitional processes in the creation of deviance.Law and Society Review, 15, 161–182.
Tyler, T. R. (1987). Why people follow the law: Procedural justice, legitimacy, and compliance. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Psychological Association, New York.
U.S. Congress: House. (1985).E. F. Hutton mail and wire fraud case. Hearings. Subcommittee on Crime of the Committee on the Judiciary, 99th Congress, 1st Session, June 19, July 19, and August 21. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office.
Welch, W. (1985, May 16). Hearing feels heat from E. F. Hutton decision.The Morning News, Wilmington, Delaware: p. A14.
Wilder, D. A. (1986). Social categorization: Implications for creation and reduction of intergroup bias. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.),Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 19) (pp. 291–355). New York: Academic Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
About this article
Cite this article
Hans, V.P., Ermann, M.D. Responses to corporate versus individual wrongdoing. Law Hum Behav 13, 151–166 (1989). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01055921
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01055921