In the current study, the actor–observer effect is tested with both mock parole board members and the public evaluating the responsibility of parole board members for a decision resulting in a parolee reoffending and committing a murder. Participants (two samples with a combined N = 1317) were randomly assigned to act as a mock parole board member and make a decision (which ended in the parolee reoffending) or as a member of the public who read a story about the same parole decision and outcome. Findings suggest that the traditional actor–observer asymmetry emerged across blame and responsibility concepts, emotion and moral judgments. Overall, the public held harsher judgments than the mock parole board members. Implications regarding self-enhancement, methodology and attribution theory are discussed.

在当前的研究中，模仿者假释委员会成员和公众评估假释委员会成员对导致假释者再犯和谋杀的决定的责任进行了测试，观察了行为观察者的作用。参与者（两个样本的总和为N  = 1317）被随机分配为模拟假释委员会成员并做出决定（最终以假释再次犯罪）或作为阅读相同假释决定故事的公众成员和结果。研究结果表明，传统的行为者与观察者之间的不对称出现在责备和责任概念，情感和道德判断上。总体而言，公众的判决比假释董事会成员要严厉。讨论了关于自我增强，方法论和归因理论的含义。