• Korean Journal of Social Welfare
• /
• v.64 no.4
• /
• pp.209-231
• /
• 2012

Recently, the many anti- stigma program use the 'mental illness is an illness like any other biogenetic illness' approach. This is based on Weiner's attribution affection theory. However, mental illness is difficult to be applied with attribution affection premise because attributing no blame for mental problem(biogenetic cause) leads to fear and dangerousness. We proposed a modified attribution affection model that explains the relations between biogenetic causal belief and social distance. Our model assumed that attributing personal responsibility for each mental problem leads to anger and social distance. And attributing no blame for mental problem(biogenetic causal belief) reinforces perception of dangerousness and social distance. This study presented typical vignettes of schizophrenia, depression and alcoholism according to the diagnosis criteria of DSM-IV to 768 university students randomly. Path analysis was used to test modified attribution affection model. The major findings are, First our original model modified partially for fit index. So final model assumed that i) The more respondents believed personal responsibility, the more anger, the more anger reaction corresponded closely with more social distance. ii) biogenetic causal beliefs leads to a worsening of dangerousness and perception of dangerousness leads to a increasing of social distance. Second, multi-group analysis was conducted to verify how a modified attribution affection model would be applicable to three groups. The result is that there is no difference among three groups. Finding from this research suggest to change anti-stigma program that use medical model.

• Korean Journal of Legislative Studies
• /
• v.25 no.1
• /
• pp.45-78
• /
• 2019

This study examines the relationship between individuals' perceptions on party conflict and affective polarization. It pays particular attention to party identification as a moderating variable. Using a survey conducted in the context of the 2014 Korean local election, the present study hypothesizes that perceiving serious inter-party conflict in the political arena is likely to increase negative feelings toward out-group political party among partisans only. Not only do the results confirm our hypothesis but suggest that conflict perception leads to affective polarization among partisan voters. This paper contributes to our understanding of the mechanism that links the attribution of blame to out-group political party for legislative gridlock with ever-growing affective polarization of the electorate.

• Korean Journal of Child Studies
• /
• v.29 no.5
• /
• pp.79-96
• /
• 2008

This study analyzed differences of role behaviors of participants in bullying according to bystanders' characteristics. Participants were 112 $5^{th}$, $6^{th}$ and $7^{th}$ grade students. Bystanders' characteristics of empathy, negative attitudes about bullying, psychological burden, distorting of consequences, and attribution of blame were classified by K-Means Cluster Analysis into three groups with similar characteristics : lack of empathy/cognitive distorting, anti-bullying, and perception of cost groups. Major findings were that : the lack of empathy/cognitive distorting group had higher levels of bullying behavior than the anti-bullying group and higher levels of victimization than the perception of cost group. The anti-bullying group showed higher levels of defense behavior than the lack of empathy/cognitive distorting group. Implications for future research were discussed.

• Korean Journal of Legislative Studies
• /
• v.27 no.1
• /
• pp.79-115
• /
• 2021

Voters' negative evaluations of government performance lower their trust in government, which functions as the reward and punishment for the government. Trust in government thus serves to promote political accountability of the representative government. However, voters build their confidence toward the party government where the ruling party is responsible for the performance. Considering this partisan nature, we empirically examine that the influence of voters' performance evaluations on governmental trust is conditional on their party identifications. While higher perceptions of political/social conflict and increasing negative evaluations of government policies and economic performance are associated with the lower level of confidence in government, the relationship is contrasted between different party identifiers. For supporters of the ruling party in 2020, the negative evaluations of government performance are not likely to reduce trust in government a lot. On the contrary, those who identify with the main opposition party show the most prominent effect of negative evaluations on their distrust in government. This study demonstrates that trust in government is affected by voters' partisan preferences, not entirely by evaluations of government performance. Such a distortion of the reward and sanction function of governmental trust might lead to the weakening of the accountability mechanism in representative democracy.