Can revenge be just or otherwise justified?

Bar-Elli, Gilead; Heyd, David

doi:10.1111/j.1755-2567.1986.tb00100.x

Cited by 22 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The delay was influenced by (low) immediate revenge possibility and planning tendencies. The results on time between the offense and revenge act are in line with theoretical reflections on revenge arguing that revenge usually takes place after some time has passed (Frijda, 2007;Kim & Smith, 1993), in part because it requires planning (Bar-Elli & Heyd, 1986).…”

Section: Delaysupporting

confidence: 76%

“…Avengers themselves did not agree with the independent raters, believing that their revenge act was less severe than the preceding offense, suggesting a self-serving bias in perception (cf. Bar-Elli & Heyd, 1986;Chakrabati, 2005). This study did not incorporate the targets of revenge, who may be the only party that views revenge as disproportionally severe.…”

Section: Similaritymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…How much harm does an insult do and (how) can it be proportionally repaid by breaking a valued object of the offender? This is particularly pertinent as theoretical literature on revenge suggests that revenge can be immoderate (Bar-Elli & Heyd, 1986;Frijda, 2007;Kim & Smith, 1993;Uniacke, 2000). This may be a direct result of offenses and revenge acts being not easily quantifiable in real life, resulting in (perceived) mismatches in severity, which may potentially cause destructive cycles of retaliation and violence (Elshout, Nelissen, & Van Beest, 2017a;Elster, 1990;Otterbein & Otterbein, 1965).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Real-life revenge may not effectively deter norm violations

Elshout¹,

Nelissen

Beest

et al. 2019

The Journal of Social Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The current article examined the characteristics of real-life revenge acts. A demographically diverse sample of avengers described autobiographical revenge acts and the preceding offense. They rated the severity of both acts, the time before taking revenge, and motives for the timing. Independent raters also rated the severity of both acts and coded the domains. Results revealed that real-life revenge is (1) by and large equally common as revealed by lab-based studies on revenge, but (2) is usually a delayed response, and (3) although similar to offenses in severity (according to independent parties), it is dissimilar in the domain. These characteristics contradict manifestations of revenge as studied in lab research (e.g., as a response that must take place immediately and in the same domain). These discrepancies suggest that not all real-life instances of revenge are optimally suited to serve a deterrence function and that other motives may underlie more destructive revenge acts.

show abstract

Section: Delaysupporting

confidence: 76%

Section: Similaritymentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Real-life revenge may not effectively deter norm violations

Elshout¹,

Nelissen

Beest

et al. 2019

The Journal of Social Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…If revenge is chosen as a behavioural response, it usually occurs after a period of reflection and rumination (Bar-Elli & Heyd, 1986;Bies, et al, 1997;Stuckless & Goranson, 1992). This is consistent with Buss's (1961) argument that revenge is enacted after the offended party has had a chance to "mull over" what has occurred.…”

Section: From Revenge and Forgiveness Cognitions To Behaviourmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Between the initial assessment of blame and the behavioural enactment of revenge and forgiveness, thoughts of revenge and forgiveness are formed (Bar-Elli & Heyd, 1986;Buss, 1961;Cloke, 1993;Fitzgibbons, 1986;Murphy, 1988;Stuckless & Goranson, 1992). It is this period of contemplation that partly distinguishes revenge and forgiveness from other forms of reciprocity (e.g., hostile reaction) (Stuckless & Goranson, 1992).…”

Section: From Revenge and Forgiveness Cognitions To Behaviourmentioning

confidence: 99%

Forgiveness and Revenge: Empirical Study of Malaysian Business Employees

Ismail

Mohideen

Togok

2009

CMR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Building on a previous work by Bradfield and Aquino (1999), this study examines factors influencing forgiveness and revenge cognition and behaviors among Malaysian executives. A questionnaire survey method was undertaken. Respondents were selected by using convenience sampling method from four Malaysian organizations. The findings from this study suggested that 1) that the contemplation of revenge or forgiveness is positively related to their behavioural equivalents: (2) that power asymmetries between the offender and the victim in a corporation has an influence on the forgiveness or revenge behaviour; (3) that revenge cognitions and behaviour in a corporation are influenced by the offence severity: and (4) that religion (especially), gender, and ethnic have asignificant influence to forgiveness cognitions and behaviours.

show abstract

Your act is worse than mine: Perception bias in revenge situations

Elshout

Nelissen

Beest

2017

Aggressive Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Theoretical reflections suggest that avengers and targets of revenge have self-serving perception biases when judging the severity of revenge acts and preceding offenses. Empirical research investigating such biases has so far focused on either the offense or the revenge act and may have confounded a perception bias with a situational selection bias (i.e., avengers and targets selecting different events in self-serving ways, so that there may be actual, as opposed to perceptual, differences in severity). The current research circumvents this shortcoming by empirically investigating this perception bias by assessing avengers' and targets' severity scores of both the offense and the revenge act, and comparing these scores with severity scores of independent raters. Results show that although there is a situational selection bias, there is also a perception bias for both avengers and targets: Both avengers and targets believe that the other person's act is worse than their own act. This perception bias may explain the existence of perpetuating revenge cycles.

show abstract

Can revenge be just or otherwise justified?

Cited by 22 publications

References 1 publication

Real-life revenge may not effectively deter norm violations

Real-life revenge may not effectively deter norm violations

Forgiveness and Revenge: Empirical Study of Malaysian Business Employees

Your act is worse than mine: Perception bias in revenge situations

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About