Table 1
Means, standard deviation (in parentheses) and correlations among measures.
| Evalutation of the politician after the scandal – T1 | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| M (SD) | 2 | 3 | |
| 1. Communal traits | 0.21 (0.18) | 0.64*** | 0.45*** |
| 2. Agentic traits | 0.29 (0.16) | 0.32*** | |
| 3. Global attitude | 0.23 (0.14) | ||
| Evaluation of the politician after the defensive reaction – T2 | |||
| 1. Communal traits | 0.27 (0.18) | 0.53*** | 0.41*** |
| 2. Agentic traits | 0.30 (0.17) | 0.36*** | |
| 3. Global attitude | 0.28 (0.17) | ||
[i] Note: *** p < 0.001.
Figure 1
Mean global attitude toward a scandal perpetrator as a function of his/her gender and the communicative tactic used to defend him/herself.
Figure 2
Mean agency perception of the perpetrator as a function of his/her gender and the communicative tactic used to defend him/herself.
Figure 3
Mean communality perception of the perpetrator as a function of his/her gender and the communicative tactic used to defend him/herself.