Interpersonal risk and the evaluation of transgressions in close relationships

An experiment examined individuals' willingness to excuse a romantic partne r of blame for a transgression when perceptions that a relationship is risk y are salient. Participants evaluated an actual transgression on measures t apping three levels of appraisal: (a) initial impressions of the act (i.e., severity of the transgression), (b) considerations of the context in which it occurred (i.e.,judgments about excuses and extenuating context), and (c ) judgments about its broader implications for the relationship (attributio ns of globality). Evaluator perspective was also varied. Half the participa nts (actors) evaluated their own partner's wrongdoing: half (observers) eva luated another participant's partner's wrongdoing. Compared to controls, ri sk participants rated the transgression as more severe and were more cautio us and risk-averse in assessing the merits of potentially excusing informat ion. Evaluator perspective did not influence these: judgments, a finding co nsistent with a cognitive interpretation of the results. In contrast, the e ffects of risk on judgments of globality were more pronounced among observe rs than among actors, suggesting that motivational pressures come into play when the evaluative stakes are higher.