PRIVATE REACTIONS TO PUBLIC TRANSGRESSIONS - PREDICTORS OF EVALUATIVE RESPONSES TO ALLEGATIONS OF POLITICAL MISCONDUCT

Effects of blameworthiness, account type, and politician power on respondents' evaluations of political offenders were examined. Political expertise and party affiliation served as additional categorical predictors of evaluations. Participants read two scenarios describing the misadventures of fictitious politicians and their accounts and evaluated the politicians. Results revealed that political novices were more generous than experts in their evaluations. Politicians who transgressed intentionally were evaluated more negatively than politicians who transgressed accidentally. Respondents who shared partisanship with the politicians evaluated them more positively than respondents who did not share partisanship. Finally, results revealed interactions among politician power, account type, party, and scenario. This study points to the utility of a sociolinguistic framework for the systematic investigation of respondents' private reactions to public political transgressions.