Authors: David Schloesser
Mentors: B Kal Munis
Insitution: Utah Valley University
How do place-based identities influence American’s attitudes towards perpetrators of politically motivated violence? Through the implementation of a pre-registered conjoint experiment, I seek to answer this question. Ideally, and under normative circumstances, punishment of politically motivated violence should be applied to perpetrators with considerations only towards what/who was targeted in the act and the severity of the violence committed. In the U.S. however, evaluations of guilt are determined through the trial of peers, leaving room for the influence of in-group and out-group biases to appear in the judgement of perpetrators according to the suggestions of Social Identity Theory. As such, biases arise that cloud human judgement based on preconceived attitudes towards various group identities that influence our opinions when judging other individuals. One’s sense of place, or how strongly they identify themselves with their locality and its’ culture, is one of these powerful group social identities that establishes a salient “in-group” persona to other locals, while influencing attitudes towards various “out-groups” of people not from that place. Holding constant other considerations pertinent to acts of politically motivated violence, Americans more harshly evaluate perpetrators of violence from geographic communities other than their own. To judge the relative weight that these place-based identities hold towards the judgement of political violence perpetrators, evaluators were presented with perpetrators with randomly assigned personal characteristics (e.g., where they are from) and varied features of the violent act (e.g., how severe the act was, what/who was targeted), and asked to determine the level of punishment or mercy to be assigned to each perpetrator. I found that perpetrator place characteristics indeed influences the evaluator’s excusal of political violence, however when weighted against the features of the act, the nature of the act matters much more for evaluations on average. These findings can be interpreted as normatively negative, given that an evaluator’s place identity appears to reflect in-group out-group biases that affect the assignment of punishment to a crime. However, the disproportionate effect of the violent act’s target and severity are normatively encouraging.