Individual Factor of Blame Attribution in Situations of Violence Against Women

Objective. Analysis of the relationship between the individual psychological and sociodemographic characteristics of bystanders and their tendency to blame the victim.
Background. Despite the fact that the responsibility for violence always on the agressor, blaming the victim is still a common phenomenon. Currently, the factors of victim blaming are widely studied abroad, but there are contradictions in the obtained data. There is an insufficient amount of research in Russia, and existing research mainly concerns global factors, such as the role of the media.
Study design. The study examined individual psychological and social-demographic characteristics of the groups of bystanders who choose different strategies of blame attribution in a situation of violence. According to the results of the author's questionnaire, respondents were divided into three groups: blaming the aggressor, blaming the victim and inconsistent in blaming. The groups were compared by self-attitude, empathy, basic beliefs, sociodemographic characteristics and awareness of various aspects of the problem of violence. The differences between the groups were verified through the comparative analysis.
Participants. Russian sample, 91 people (38,5% of men, 61,5% of women) from 19 to 68 years old (M = 32,3; SD = 13,6).
Measurements. Vignettes containing descriptions of violent situations and options for attributing blame to participants in the situations. Author's questionnaire for sociodemographic data and data about awareness of violence, personal experience related to this topic. Multidimensional questionnaire of self-attitude research by S.R. Panteleev, “Diagnostics of empathy level” by V.V. Boyko, Russian version of World assumptions scale by M.A. Padun, A.V. Kotelnikova.
Results. We found significant differences between the groups according to the characteristics of self-attitude: the level of self-attachment in the group blaming the aggressor is significantly different from the level of self-attachment in other groups, the level of self-control in the group blaming the aggressor is significantly different from the level of self-control in the group blaming the victim. Significant differences in the level of believes in a just world between the group blaming the aggressor and other groups have been revealed. There were no significant differences in the characteristics of empathy. The groups considered differ significantly in assessing the significance of the problem of violence, awareness of the phenomenon of victim-blaming, the presence of the professional, volunteer or studying experience of interacting with a victim of violence, age and place of residence.
Conclusions. Identify the Individual factors of victim blaming in the Russian sample. The more the respondent believes in the just world, the higher the level of self-attachment and self-control, the more likely he is to blame the victim. The following individual factors are associated with a lower probability of victim-blaming: assessment of the problem of violence as more significant, awareness of the existence of such a phenomenon as “victim-blaming”, the professional, volunteer or studying experience of interacting with a victim of violence, young age and living in a megalopolis.

1. Boiko V.V. Energiya emotsii v obshchenii: vzglyad na sebya i na drugikh [The energy of emotions in communication: a look at yourself and others]. Moscow: Publ. Dom "Filin", 1996. 470 p. (In Russ.).
2. Kuznetsov I. Mediamemy kak instrumenty viktimbleiminga [Elektronnyi resurs] [Mediamems as victimblaming tools]. Elektronnaya biblioteka BGU [Digital Library MGPPU]. Minsk: Publ. Tsentr BGU, 2017, pp. 105–108. URL: http://elib.bsu.by/handle/123456789/183835 (Accessed 01.10.2023). (In Russ.).
3. Kurachinskaya V.P., Kulikova O.A. Viktimbleiming sredi studencheskoi molodezhi [Victimblaming among students]. Vestnik universiteta = Bulletin of the University, 2021, no. 10, pp. 178–186. DOI:10.26425/1816-4277-2021-10-178-186 (In Russ.).
4. Padun M.A., Kotel'nikova A.V. Metodika issledovaniya bazisnykh ubezhdenii lichnosti [The methodology of the study of the basic beliefs of the individual]. Moscow: Laboratoriya psikhologii i psikhoterapii posttravmaticheskogo stressa IPRAN, 2007. 95 p. (In Russ.). 
5. Pantileev S.R., Stolin V.V. Metodika issledovaniya samootnosheniya [The method of personal self-attitude research]. Moscow: Smysl, 1993. 32 p. (In Russ.).
6. Rostovskaya T.K. et al. Profilaktika nasiliya kak faktor bezopasnosti sem'i: rossiiskii i kazakhstanskii opyt [Violence prevention as a factor of family security: Russian and Kazakh experience]. Zhenshchina v rossiiskom obshchestve = Woman in Russian society, 2018, no. 1(86), pp. 78–88. DOI:10.21064/WinRS.2018.1.7 (In Russ.).
7. Abi Rached M., Hankir A., Zaman R. Emotional abuse in women and girls mediated by patriarchal upbringing and its impact on sexism and mental health: a narrative review. Psychiatria Danubina, 2021. Vol. 33 (suppl 11), pp. 137–144.
8. Adams-Price C.E., Dalton W.T., Sumrall R. Victim blaming in young, middle-aged, and older adults: Variations on the severity effect. Journal of Adult Development, 2004. Vol. 11, pp. 289–295. DOI:10.1023/B:JADE.0000044532.83720.74
9. Alicke M.D. Culpable control and the psychology of blame. Psychological bulletin, 2000. Vol. 126(4), pp. 556–574. DOI:10.1037/0033-2909.126.4.556
10. Carlyle K.E. et al. Intimate partner violence on Instagram: Visualizing a public health approach to prevention. Health Education & Behavior, 2019. Vol. 46 (2_suppl), pp. 90–96. DOI:10.1177/1090198119873917
11. Coker A.L. et al. Multi-college bystander intervention evaluation for violence prevention. American journal of preventive medicine, 2016. Vol. 50(3), pp. 295–302.     DOI:10.1016/j.amepre.2015.08.034
12. Dvir M., Nagar M. Would victims blame victims? Effects of ostracism, sexual objectification, and empathy on victim blaming. Frontiers in psychology, 2022. Vol. 13.            DOI:0.3389/fpsyg.2022.912698
13. Felson R.B., Palmore C. Biases in blaming victims of rape and other crime. Psychology of Violence, 2018. Vol. 8(3), pp. 390–399. DOI:10.1037/vio0000168
14. Felson R.B., Palmore C.C. Traditionalism and victim blaming. The Journal of Social Psychology, 2021. Vol. 161(4), pp. 492–507. DOI:10.1080/00224545.2021.1896466
15. Fischer P. et al. The bystander-effect: a meta-analytic review on bystander intervention in dangerous and non-dangerous emergencies. Psychological bulletin, 2011. Vol. 137(4), pp. 517–537. DOI:10.1037/a0023304
16. Genschow O., Vehlow B. Free to blame? Belief in free will is related to victim blaming. Consciousness and cognition, 2021. Vol. 88, pp. 103074.   DOI:10.1016/j.concog.2020.103074
17. Gracia E., Tomás J.M. Correlates of victim-blaming attitudes regarding partner violence against women among the Spanish general population. Violence against women, 2014. Vol. 20(1), pp. 26–41. DOI:10.1177/1077801213520577
18. Gravelin C.R., Biernat M., Bucher C.E. Blaming the victim of acquaintance rape: Individual, situational, and sociocultural factors. Frontiers in psychology, 2019. Vol. 9, pp. 2422. DOI:10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02422
19. Gross J.J. Emotion regulation: Affective, cognitive, and social consequences. Psychophysiology, 2002. Vol. 39, pp. 281–291. DOI:10.1017/S0048577201393198
20. Hafer C.L., Sutton R. Belief in a just world. Handbook of social justice theory and research, 2016, pp. 145–160. DOI:10.1007/978-1-4939-3216-0_8
21. Hamby S. et al. What difference do bystanders make? The association of bystander involvement with victim outcomes in a community sample. Psychology of violence, 2016. Vol. 6(1), pp. 91–102. DOI:10.1037/a0039073
22. Harber K.D., Podolski P., Williams C.H. Emotional disclosure and victim blaming. Emotion, 2015. Vol. 15(5), pp. 603–614. DOI:10.1037/emo0000056
23. Ivert A.K., Merlo J., Gracia E. Country of residence, gender equality and victim blaming attitudes about partner violence: A multilevel analysis in EU. The European Journal of Public Health, 2018. Vol. 28(3), pp. 559–564. DOI:10.1093/eurpub/ckx138
24. Johnson V.E. et al. “It’s not in your head”: Gaslighting,‘Splaining, victim blaming, and other harmful reactions to microaggressions. Perspectives on psychological science, 2021. Vol. 16(5), pp. 1024–1036. DOI:10.1177/17456916211011963
25. Karlsson M. et al. Intimate partner violence against women in the EU: a multilevel analysis of the contextual and individual impact on public perceptions. Women & Criminal Justice, 2022. Vol. 32(5), pp. 417–430. DOI:10.1080/08974454.2020.1835792
26. Kay A.C. et al. Panglossian ideology in the service of system justification: How complementary stereotypes help us to rationalize inequality. Advances in experimental social psychology, 2007. Vol. 39, pp. 305–358. DOI:10.1016/S0065-2601(06)39006-5
27. Lerner M.J. The belief in a just world. Springer US, 1980, pp. 9–30. DOI:10.1007/978-1-4899-0448-5_2
28. Martens J.P. et al. Meaning and blame: Meaning threats increase victim blaming, but profession and art can diminish it. International journal of psychology, 2023. Vol. 58(5).      DOI:10.1002/ijop.12916
29. Munsch C.L., Willer R. The role of gender identity threat in perceptions of date rape and sexual coercion. Violence against women, 2012. Vol. 18(10), pp. 1125–1146.            DOI:10.1177/1077801212465151
30. Pinciotti C.M., Orcutt H.K. It won’t happen to me: An examination of the effectiveness of defensive attribution in rape victim blaming. Violence against women, 2020. Vol. 26(10), pp. 1059–1079. DOI:10.1177/1077801219853367
31. Pratt-Eriksson D., Bergbom I., Lyckhage E.D. Don't ask don't tell: Battered Women living in Sweden encounter with healthcare personnel and their experience of the care given. International journal of qualitative studies on health and well-being, 2014. Vol. 9(1), pp. 23166. DOI:10.3402/qhw.v9.23166
32. Sánchez-Prada A. et al. Bystanders of intimate partner violence against women and their willingness to intervene: An analysis of secondary data in Spain. PLoS one, 2022. Vol. 17(9), pp. e0274822. DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0274822
33. Shaver K.G., Drown D. On causality, responsibility, and self-blame: a theoretical note. Journal of personality and social psychology, 1986. Vol. 50(4), pp. 697–702.            DOI:10.1037/0022-3514.50.4.697
34. Slakoff D.C. “She did see warning signs but chose to ignore them”: perpetrator justification and victim-blaming narratives in true crime podcasts about intimate partner violence. Feminist media studies, 2023, pp. 1–17. DOI:10.1080/14680777.2023.2171086
35. Spaccatini F. et al. Victim blaming 2.0: blaming sexualized victims of online harassment lowers bystanders’ helping intentions. Current Psychology, 2022, pp. 1–11.        DOI:10.1007/s12144-022-02884-8
36. Strickler S. et al. Variations in Women’s Attribution of Blame for Sexual Assault. Journal of interpersonal violence, 2023. Vol. 38(19-20), pp. 10947–10971.   DOI:10.1177/08862605231178359
37. Strömwall L.A., Alfredsson H., Landström S. Blame attributions and rape: Effects of belief in a just world and relationship level. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 2013. Vol. 18(2), pp. 254–261. DOI:10.1111/j.2044-8333.2012.02044.x
38. Wemrell M. et al. Towards understanding the Nordic paradox: A review of qualitative interview studies on intimate partner violence against women (IPVAW) in Sweden. Sociology Compass, 2019. Vol. 13(6), pp. e12699. DOI:10.1111/soc4.12699