# Blameocracy: Causal Attribution in Political Communication

**Authors:** Francesco Bilotta, Alberto Binetti, Giacomo Manferdini  
**arXiv:** [2504.06550](https://arxiv.org/abs/2504.06550)  
**Date:** 2025-04-09  
**Summary page:** https://www.summarizepaper.com/en/paper/2504.06550v1/

## Key points

- Researchers propose a supervised method to detect causal attribution in political texts, aiming to distinguish between expressions of merit and blame.
- Significant shift towards causal attribution observed in U.S. Congress members' tweets post-2016 presidential election, attributed to changes in rhetorical strategy rather than actor or topic composition variations.
- Trade-off between positive and negative tones identified within causal communication, with government officials emphasizing merit and opposition members casting blame based on power status.
- Blame within political discourse associated with lower trust in politicians and perceived government effectiveness, spreading more virally than expressions of merit.
- Study references various sources including Lombrozo (2012), Loureiro et al. (2022), Macaulay and Song (2023), Malhotra and Kuo (2008), Malle et al. (2014), Morag and Loewenstein (2024), Neyman (1923), Nguyen et al. (2020), Pennebaker et al. (2022), Piazza and Sousa (2014), Reimers and Gurevych (2019), Rozin and Royzman (2001), Rubin (1974), Schwartzstein and Sunderam (2021) among others, as well as Baldassarri and Page(2021), Barberá et al. (2019), Barron & Fries(2024a,b) among others for consultation.

## Summary

In this study, the researchers propose a supervised method to detect causal attribution in political texts. Specifically, they aim to distinguish between expressions of merit and blame. Through analyzing four million tweets shared by U.S. Congress members from 2012 to 2023, they observe a significant shift towards causal attribution following the 2016 presidential election. This shift is attributed to changes in rhetorical strategy rather than variations in the composition of actors or topics within the political debate. Within the realm of causal communication, the researchers identify a trade-off between positive and negative tones. They find that power status serves as a key determinant: government officials tend to emphasize merit while opposition members tend to cast blame. This pattern effectively distinguishes causal communication from purely affective communication. Furthermore, their findings indicate that blame within political discourse is associated with lower levels of trust in politicians and perceived government effectiveness. Additionally, blame tends to spread more virally than expressions of merit. The study draws upon various sources such as Lombrozo (2012), Loureiro et al. (2022), Macaulay and Song (2023), Malhotra and Kuo (2008), Malle et al. (2014), Morag and Loewenstein (2024), Neyman (1923), Nguyen et al. (2020), Pennebaker et al. (2022), Piazza and Sousa (2014), Reimers and Gurevych (2019), Rozin and Royzman (2001), Rubin (1974), Schwartzstein and Sunderam (2021), Shapiro et al. (2022), Shiller(2017) , Slomanand Lagnado(2015) among others. Additionally, references from Baldassarri and Page(2021), Barberá et al. (2019), Barron & Fries(2024a,b), Baumeister et al. (2001), Bellodi et al. (2023), Bénabou et al. (2024; 2018), Bilotta & Manferdini(2024) , Boxell et al. (2024) were also consulted.