Rena Adler- Work Cited

Work Cited

Becker, Steven M. "Commentary: Psychological Assistance After Environmental
Accidents: A Policy Perspective." Environmental Health Perspectives 105 (1997): 1557-1563.
SUMMARY OF ARTICLE: The article discusses psychosocial assistance given to victims following environmental accidents and emergencies.
RELEVANCE TO ARGUMENT: Becker writes that natural disasters are “acts of G-d” and therefore do not lead to blame. Conversely, technological disasters are caused by other human beings and consequently elicit blame. Furthermore, although natural disasters often lead to the production of a “therapeutic community” rather than blame, they also have the potential to divide a community.

Drayer, Calvin S. "Psychological Factors and Problems, Emergency and Long- Term."
Annals of the American Academy of Political Science and Social Science 309 (1957): 151-159.
SUMMARY OF ARTICLE: Drayer discusses responses before, during and following a catastrophe. Often, feelings of fear, anxiety and guilt are felt following a disaster. The way to remove these horrible feelings is through proper training.
RELEVANCE TO ARGUMENT: Following a natural disaster, people do not feel a need to blame others human beings. Rather, they are viewed as “acts of G-d”.

Edwards, Margie L. Kiter. "An Interdisciplinary Perspective on Disasters and Stress:
The Promise of an Ecological Framework." Sociological Forum 13 (1998): 115-132
SUMMARY OF ARTICLE: Kiter writes that disasters influence each person’s mental health in different ways due to unique conditions of each individual.
RELEVANCE TO ARGUMENT: Regarding disasters caused by humans, “people tend to affix blame and define the event as preventable, resulting in greater anxiety than is associated with disasters caused by environmental agents” (117). Thus, Kiter does not feel that blame is a result of a natural disaster.

Fritz, Charles E. and Williams, Harry B. "The Human Being in Disasters: A Research
Perspective." Annals of the American Academy of Political Science and Social Science 309 (1957): 42-51.
SUMMARY OF ARTICLE: Fritz and Williams discuss the way in which victims behave during disasters.
RELEVANCE TO ARGUMENT: Fritz and Williams strongly argue that blame does not actually occur following a natural disaster. Rather, it is only a
“commonly held stereotype that in the wake of disasters people inevitably and universally… heap blame for the disaster on innocent victims…find little support in systematic findings” (49). In addition, they assert that any blame that does seem to appear is only due to the victims’ desires that the disaster does not occur again, “agents who are blamed…are blamed for disasters in the future…” ( 49) Furthermore, any blame that is clearly seen is due to only a few people who are in search of a scapegoat. Also, newspapers often prominently display blame felt by only a minority of people, thus causing one to feel as though blame is felt by a majority. The newspapers then “create issues on which the public is expected to stand…” (50)

Gephart, Robert P. "The Textual Approach: Risk and Blame in Disaster Sensemaking."
The Academy of Management Journal 36 (1993): 1465-1514.
SUMMARY OF ARTICLE: Regarding a lethal pipeline accident, Gephart analyzes risk and blame using textual and ethnographic approaches.
RELEVANCE TO ARGUMENT: Often the head of an organization is blamed for disasters.

Kasperson, Roger E. and Pijawa. "Societal Response to Hazard and Major Hazard
Events: Comparing Natural and Technical Hazards." Public Administration Review 45 (1985): 7-18.
SUMMARY OF ARTICLE: Most often, natural hazards occur in non- developed countries. However, with the advent of technology, technological hazards have been occurring with greater frequency. The article discusses the way in which hazards are managed and the ways in which technological catastrophes affect the victims and their communities.
RELEVANCE TO ARGUMENT: Following a natural disaster, a “therapeutic community” and a strong sense of rebuilding results. Conversely, after a technological disaster, blame is placed upon an individual or responsible organization.

Mitchell, James K., et al. "A Contextual Model of Natural Hazard." Geographical Review
79 (1989): 391-409.
SUMMARY OF ARTICLE: In England, following a catastrophic storm, little was done. This was due to many other issues at that time that were regarded as more urgent. Thus, a natural disaster can be modified due to sociocultural, political, environmental and economic issues at that time.
RELEVANCE TO ARGUMENT: Frequently, technological reasons for disasters are used and favored over reasons that are not the result of technology.

Moore, Harry Estill. "Toward a Theory of Disaster." American Sociological Review 21
(1956): 733-737.
SUMMARY OF ARTICLE: Catastrophes are seen as situations which are uncontrollable and thus result in psychological reactions.
RELEVANCE TO ARGUMENT: Following a catastrophe, “persons begin to seek someone to blame for their losses” (736). Their reason for doing so is that victims are then able to “search for a scapegoat on whom emotional tension may be released” (736). Additionally, “people argue that they did nothing to deserve such a fate; therefore someone else must have” (736).

Turner, Barry A. "The Organizational and Interorganizational Development of
Disasters." Administrative Science Quarterly 21 (1976): 378-397.
SUMMARY OF ARTICLE: The way in which people behaved following three large scale catastrophes were studied. Additionally, the conditions which caused these disasters to result were also examined.
RELEVANCE TO ARGUMENT: Sometimes, following a tragedy, rather than acting in a simple manner, people begin to “take action to shift the blame” (391).

Turner , Ralph H.. "Integrative Beliefs in Group Crises." The Journal of Conflict
Resolution 16 (1972): 25-40.
SUMMARY OF ARTICLE: Turner discusses which instances cause conflicts amongst groups to escalate.
RELEVANCE TO ARGUMENT: Great effort is made to place blame for a tragedy upon a portion of a community. Each group then tries to place blame upon the other. However, the opposite is seen as well, “residents show a surprising reluctance to single out officials for blame” (26). The reason for this is that only “individuals who have previously aroused anger are suitable recipients” (26).