“I Avenge; Others Aggress”: A Victim–Perpetrator Asymmetry in Judging Whether a Transgression Was Motivated by Revenge

Abstract

In two studies, victims differed from perpetrators as to whether they viewed a transgression as motivated by a desire for revenge. When participants wrote about autobiographical episodes in which they hurt others, they were somewhat likely to report that they were motivated by revenge; when the same participants wrote about episodes in which others hurt them, they were less likely to report that the perpetrators were motivated by revenge. This asymmetry could act as a barrier to reconciliation. This asymmetry may also facilitate a cycle of revenge in that those who view themselves as the targets of unprovoked aggression (as opposed to vengeance) may be especially likely to feel that they have a score to settle.

Does Trait Hostility Moderate the Asymmetry in Victim-Perpetrator Perceptions of Aggressive Behaviors?

“…Consequently, victims, relative to perpetrators, report perpetrators’ behaviors as being particularly harmful (e.g., Adams & Inesi, 2016; Baumeister, 1996; Elshout et al., 2017). Also, to minimize their blameworthiness, victims often downplay the legitimate reasons for the perpetrators’ aggressive behaviors, framing the aggression as not only harsh, but as incomprehensible and arbitrary as well (e.g., Baumeister et al., 1990; Ent & Parton, 2019). Even if victims experience an aggressive behavior as retaliation for a previous transgression (i.e., victims are the target of revenge), and are presumably worthy of at least some blame for the perpetrator’s’ reactions, they are motivated to report perpetrators’ retaliatory behavior as spiteful and disproportionate so as to look like the more harmed party in the ongoing dispute (e.g., Elshout et al., 2017; Stillwell et al., 2008).…”

“…Unlike victims, perpetrators would not benefit from sympathy or recompense by viewing their aggressive behavior as more harmful. Rather, perpetrators often report their aggressive behaviors as justified, legitimate, and proportionate responses to provocations (e.g., Elshout et al., 2017; Ent & Parton, 2019; Stillwell et al., 2008). In this way, perpetrators view their behaviors as “evening the score,”—any dispute they had with the victim is now settled—thus, victims would not be justified to retaliate further (e.g., Stillwell et al., 2008).…”

“…As with many past studies of victim-perpetrator asymmetries (e.g., Adams & Inesi, 2016; Baumeister et al., 1990; Ent & Parton, 2019; Stillwell et al., 2008), our Study 1 used an autobiographical recall approach: Participants recalled an instance when they were the victims of an aggressive behavior, an instance when they were the perpetrator of an aggressive behavior, and then provided several ratings of their memories. The logic of such an approach is that participants’ aggressive memories indicate how the episodes were encoded, stored, and recalled.…”

“…As for a few examples, victims, compared to perpetrators, view harmful behaviors as being more intentional (e.g. Adams & Inesi, 2016), being more caused by the perpetrator’s aggressive personality (Lochman, 1987), having longer-lasting harm (e.g., Baumeister et al., 1990), and being more motivated by revenge (Ent & Parton, 2019).…”

Psycho-Social Correlates of Cyberbullying among Polish Adolescents

“…It is suggested that previous victimization activates a mechanism causing an individual to tend violate social norms [ 94 ]. Another mechanism contributing to the cycle of violence [ 95 ] may be motivation for revenge [ 25 , 96 ]. Research shows that individuals who are victims “are hypervigilant of potential threats from peers and interpret benign or innocuous stimuli as a threat, thereby increasing state-level anxiety” [ 97 ].…”