Defensive Attribution of Responsibility in Juridic Decisions1

Unlike previous research efforts, the present investigation of defensive attribution of responsibility and juridic decisions combines the concepts of severity and desirability of outcome into a measure of perceived seriousness of the crime, and utilizes a specific measure of perceived similarity between respondent and offender derived from respondents' descriptions of the offenders and themselves. Contrary to expectations, data obtained from a statewide mail questionnaire survey reveal that (a) perceived similarity between the respondent and offender is neither a strong nor a significant influence on recommended sentences for offenders; (b) perceived seriousness of the crime exerts a significant impact on recommended sentences for offenders; and (c) other variables, most notably familiarity with like offenders, included within the concept of defensive attribution of responsibility may contribute significantly to variations in recommended sentences for offenders for specific crime‐respondent categories. Possible reasons for, and implications of, this limited and circumscribed support for utilizing defensive attribution of responsibility in explaining sentencing recommendations are offered.