While reading the article “Role of Personal Characteristics in Cognitive Dissonance and Causal Attribution” by Pawan Kumar, it really made me think of how I would characterize those that commit crimes. The article was about research that was conducted in India about suggested punishment for criminals under different circumstances. The article states that in India, females are supposed to be less-criminal minded than males. I believe that here in the United States that is also thought. It also says that an educated or wealthy person is more than likely going to be innocent and less-criminal minded than those that are uneducated and poor. I also agree that these stereotypes would be found today in the United States. However, many women, educated and wealthy people have proved that this is not always true. In our cultural, women are supposed to be the more gentle of male and female and when most people think of women they would think of a mother as do probably most countries. The article says that an educated female was given a greater suggested punishment. Here in the United States, a woman was found not guilty of killing her little girl even though all evidence pointed that she did it. Was it because she was a woman or was there really not enough evidence? Educated people are thought to be smart and would know better than to commit a crime but that is not always what happens. I do believe though that in the United States, those that are educated and/or wealthy seem to get off easier than those that are uneducated and/or poor. For the most part in the United States, when someone hears of a crime that is committed, people usually automatically think it is an uneducated poor male and/or a male of different race. Reading the article and thinking about things that have happened in the United States, I think the researcher would have gotten pretty much the same results that were conducted in India besides for where educated women received more...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document