<p>I hope I can start off with two scenarios to describe the behaviour I'm trying to find a word for.</p>
<p>A child accidentally smashes a window whilst playing a ball game. People assume the child broke the window as no-one else had been near the window, but they cannot know with complete certainty. The child  genuinely feels victimised even though they are aware they have broken the window and, over time, what they feel to be the misplaced blame overtakes the actual transgression itself.</p>
<p>John reports to his boss that the assembly line stopped because of Larry's error. At the time of reporting he genuinely believed this, everyone is comfortable with the explanation. Later on in a quiet moment, John digs a little deeper and finds that actually someone accidentally hit the power button. John decides not to report his new findings. He never liked Larry that much, and after all, he only found this new information on his own initiaive. Had he not investigated further, no-one would be any wiser including himself. In fact this is the kind of thing Larry would have done anyway and he continues to hold Larry culpable.</p>
<p>I'm fascinated by the minds ability to delude itself and to maintain ideas that are often in contradiction with each other. It seems to be more likely to occur when there is public information and private information and the owner of that private information can compartmentalise it within their own mind. I'm not a trained psychologist and I don't have any formal education within it although I find many aspects interesting.</p>
<p>Is there a formal term for this behavior or aspect of the mind, and where would one start if they were interested in learning more ?</p>
<p>Thankyou,
Peter.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-07-17T19:48:42.987Z
The two scenarios you describe sound completely different - how do you think they are related? Your description in the 4th paragraph brings to mind "cognitive dissonance" but I'm not sure that's what you have in mind and it seems at best loosely related to the stories.
Bryan Krause
CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-07-17T20:33:23.770Z
Hi Bryan, thanks for the feedback - I think the common thread is that in each case is that each subject has access to private information that if introduced into the public sphere would change the conclusions people may be able to reach - and in choosing to keep that private they seek to influence what is publicly known.   ... and further to that, act in the public realm as though that private information had never come to light.   I hope that helps even though I've have to be quite wordy to elucidate my thoughts.
Peter Rhodes
CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-07-17T20:44:05.497Z
Maybe https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-concealment or maybe just...secrets? I think it may be hard to pin down because there are multiple possible motivations to the same behavior that can be entirely different.
Bryan Krause
CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-07-20T20:27:08.283Z
perhaps you can start by looking up theory of mind: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_of_mind
Moss Murderer
CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-08-03T06:27:56.913Z
I do think both cases are a form of cognitive dissonance they're also a form of population or crowd bias assumption of responsibility basic form I think they're both gaslighting where the actual accusation is worse than the ACT. Almost almost even to the point of unearned guilt or projection of guilt
hroberts092217
<social-psychology>
Looking for a formal term for a type of behaviour
Peter Rhodes
# Looking for a formal term for a type of behaviour

(Asked by: username_0 on 2022-07-17)

I hope I can start off with two scenarios to describe the behaviour I'm trying to find a word for.

A child accidentally smashes a window whilst playing a ball game. People assume the child broke the window as no-one else had been near the window, but they cannot know with complete certainty. The child genuinely feels victimised even though they are aware they have broken the window and, over time, what they feel to be the misplaced blame overtakes the actual transgression itself.

John reports to his boss that the assembly line stopped because of Larry's error. At the time of reporting he genuinely believed this, everyone is comfortable with the explanation. Later on in a quiet moment, John digs a little deeper and finds that actually someone accidentally hit the power button. John decides not to report his new findings. He never liked Larry that much, and after all, he only found this new information on his own initiaive. Had he not investigated further, no-one would be any wiser including himself. In fact this is the kind of thing Larry would have done anyway and he continues to hold Larry culpable.

I'm fascinated by the minds ability to delude itself and to maintain ideas that are often in contradiction with each other. It seems to be more likely to occur when there is public information and private information and the owner of that private information can compartmentalise it within their own mind. I'm not a trained psychologist and I don't have any formal education within it although I find many aspects interesting.

Is there a formal term for this behavior or aspect of the mind, and where would one start if they were interested in learning more ?

Thankyou,
Peter.

**Tags:** social-psychology

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: The two scenarios you describe sound completely different - how do you think they are related? Your description in the 4th paragraph brings to mind "cognitive dissonance" but I'm not sure that's what you have in mind and it seems at best loosely related to the stories.  
> **username_0**: Hi Bryan, thanks for the feedback - I think the common thread is that in each case is that each subject has access to private information that if introduced into the public sphere would change the conclusions people may be able to reach - and in choosing to keep that private they seek to influence what is publicly known.   ... and further to that, act in the public realm as though that private information had never come to light.   I hope that helps even though I've have to be quite wordy to elucidate my thoughts.  
> **username_1**: Maybe https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-concealment or maybe just...secrets? I think it may be hard to pin down because there are multiple possible motivations to the same behavior that can be entirely different.  
> **username_2**: perhaps you can start by looking up theory of mind: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_of_mind  
> **username_3**: I do think both cases are a form of cognitive dissonance they're also a form of population or crowd bias assumption of responsibility basic form I think they're both gaslighting where the actual accusation is worse than the ACT. Almost almost even to the point of unearned guilt or projection of guilt  

---

## 0 answers

