Disgusted
E.J. Masicampo, Maria Barth & Nalini Ambady
Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, forthcoming
Abstract:
Knowledge of individuals’ group membership can alter moral judgments of their behavior. We found that such moral judgments were amplified when judgers learned that a person belonged to a group shown to elicit disgust in others. When a person was labeled as obese, a hippie, or “trailer trash,” people judged that person’s behavior differently than when such descriptors were omitted: Virtuous behaviors were more highly praised, and moral violations were more severely criticized. Such group-based discrimination in moral judgment was specific to the domain of moral purity. Members of disgust-eliciting groups but not members of other minorities were the target of harsh judgments for purity violations (e.g., lewd behavior) but not for other violations (e.g., refusing to help others). The same pattern held true for virtuous behaviors, so that members of disgust-eliciting groups were more highly praised than others but only in the purity domain. Furthermore, group-based discrimination was mediated by feelings of disgust toward the target group but not by other emotions. Last, analysis of New York Police Department officers’ encounters with suspected criminals revealed a similar pattern to that found in laboratory experiments. Police officers were increasingly likely to make an arrest or issue a summons as body mass index increased (i.e., as obesity rose) among people suspected of purity crimes (e.g., prostitution) but not of other crimes (e.g., burglary). Thus, moral judgments in the lab and in the real world exhibit patterns of discrimination that are both group and behavior specific.
----------------------
Punishing the Perpetrator Decreases Compensation for Victims
Gabrielle Adams & Elizabeth Mullen
Social Psychological and Personality Science, forthcoming
Abstract:
Why do victims sometimes not receive the help they need? One reason may be that people believe punishing perpetrators restores justice, which makes them less willing to help victims if the perpetrator has been punished. Participants who were first asked how much to punish a perpetrator subsequently recommended less compensation for the victim relative to participants who were asked about compensation first. In contrast, participants punished perpetrators to the same degree regardless of whether they were first asked about compensation (Study 1). These effects also held when a third party administered the initial response (Studies 2 and 3). Punishment increased people’s belief that justice had been restored, which decreased their desires for victim compensation (Study 3). Thus, the extent to which individuals are concerned about victims is influenced by whether they first consider perpetrator punishment.
----------------------
Jarret Crawford, Yoel Inbar & Victoria Maloney
Personality and Individual Differences, November 2014, Pages 218–223
Abstract:
Previous research has linked disgust sensitivity to negative attitudes toward gays and lesbians. We extend this existing research by examining the extent to which disgust sensitivity predicts attitudes more generally toward groups that threaten or uphold traditional sexual morality. In a sample of American adults (N = 236), disgust sensitivity (and particularly contamination disgust) predicted negative attitudes toward groups that threaten traditional sexual morality (e.g., pro-choice activists), and positive attitudes toward groups that uphold traditional sexual morality (e.g., Evangelical Christians). Further, disgust sensitivity was a weaker predictor of attitudes toward left-aligned and right-aligned groups whose objectives are unrelated to traditional sexual morality (e.g., gun-control/gun-rights activists). Together, these findings are consistent with a sexual conservatism account for understanding the relationship between disgust sensitivity and intergroup attitudes.
----------------------
Protect thyself: How affective self-protection increases self-interested, unethical behavior
Karen Page Winterich, Vikas Mittal & Andrea Morales
Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, forthcoming
Abstract:
In this research, we draw on the characteristics of disgust — an affective state that prompts a self-protection response — to demonstrate that experiencing disgust can also increase self-interested, unethical behaviors such as cheating. This series of studies contributes to the literature demonstrating context-specific effects on self-interested, unethical behavior. Specifically, we show that innocuous emotion-eliciting cues can elicit a focus on the protection of one’s own welfare, leading people to engage in self-interested behaviors that are unethical. This research provides evidence that the importance of clean physical environments may extend beyond visual beautification of surroundings to include economic behaviors.
----------------------
Alexander Haslam, Stephen Reicher & Megan Birney
Journal of Social Issues, September 2014, Pages 473–488
Abstract:
Milgram's classic studies are widely understood to demonstrate people's natural inclination to obey the orders of those in authority. However, of the prods that Milgram's Experimenter employed to encourage participants to continue the one most resembling an order was least successful. This study examines the impact of prods more closely by manipulating them between-participants within an analogue paradigm in which participants are instructed to use negative adjectives to describe increasingly pleasant groups. Across all conditions, continuation and completion were positively predicted by the extent to which prods appealed to scientific goals but negatively predicted by the degree to which a prod constituted an order. These results provide no support for the traditional obedience account of Milgram's findings but are consistent with an engaged followership model which argues that participants’ willingness to continue with an objectionable task is predicated upon active identification with the scientific project and those leading it.
----------------------
Demis Glasford & Felicia Pratto
European Journal of Social Psychology, forthcoming
Abstract:
Although bystanders can play an integral role in the process of social change, relatively few studies have examined the factors that influence bystander collective action. The present research explores the effect of perpetrator power on bystander efficacy and collective action, as well as the moderating role of impact of the injustice event. Across two experiments, bystanders perceived that collective action would be less effective and were less willing to engage in collective action when a high-power perpetrator engaged in injustice, compared with a low-power perpetrator. These effects were moderated by impact of the injustice event, such that the effects of power were especially present under conditions of large impact (many victims), compared with small impact (fewer victims). Whereas the effect of the interaction of perpetrator power and impact on bystander efficacy was explained by perceptions of normativity of the injustice event, the effect of the interaction on bystander collective action was explained by bystander efficacy. Implications for bystander collective action and social change are discussed.
----------------------
Wilhelm Hofmann et al.
Science, 12 September 2014, Pages 1340-1343
Abstract:
The science of morality has drawn heavily on well-controlled but artificial laboratory settings. To study everyday morality, we repeatedly assessed moral or immoral acts and experiences in a large (N = 1252) sample using ecological momentary assessment. Moral experiences were surprisingly frequent and manifold. Liberals and conservatives emphasized somewhat different moral dimensions. Religious and nonreligious participants did not differ in the likelihood or quality of committed moral and immoral acts. Being the target of moral or immoral deeds had the strongest impact on happiness, whereas committing moral or immoral deeds had the strongest impact on sense of purpose. Analyses of daily dynamics revealed evidence for both moral contagion and moral licensing. In sum, morality science may benefit from a closer look at the antecedents, dynamics, and consequences of everyday moral experience.
----------------------
An Indecent Proposal: The Dual Functions of Indirect Speech
Aleksandr Chakroff et al.
Cognitive Science, forthcoming
Abstract:
People often use indirect speech, for example, when trying to bribe a police officer by asking whether there might be “a way to take care of things without all the paperwork.” Recent game theoretic accounts suggest that a speaker uses indirect speech to reduce public accountability for socially risky behaviors. The present studies examine a secondary function of indirect speech use: increasing the perceived moral permissibility of an action. Participants report that indirect speech is associated with reduced accountability for unethical behavior, as well as increased moral permissibility and increased likelihood of unethical behavior. Importantly, moral permissibility was a stronger mediator of the effect of indirect speech on likelihood of action, for judgments of one's own versus others' unethical action. In sum, the motorist who bribes the police officer with winks and nudges may not only avoid public punishment but also maintain the sense that his actions are morally permissible.
----------------------
Mad and Misleading: Incidental Anger Promotes Deception
Jeremy Yip & Maurice Schweitzer
University of Pennsylvania Working Paper, August 2014
Abstract:
Emotions influence ethical behavior. Across four studies, we demonstrate that incidental anger, anger triggered by an unrelated situation, promotes the use of deception. In Study 1, participants who felt incidental anger were more likely to deceive their counterpart than those who felt neutral emotion. In Study 2, we replicate this finding and demonstrate that empathy mediates the relationship between anger and deception. In Study 3, we compared incidental anger to other incidental emotions including guilt, gratitude, and pride. We find that participants who felt incidental anger were more likely to use deception than were participants who felt other emotions. In Study 4, we show that incentives moderate the relationship between anger and deception. Taken together, our work reveals that anger triggered by unrelated situations promotes unethical behavior because angry people become less empathetic when pursuing their self-interest.
----------------------
Avoiding Greedy Behavior in Situations of Uncertainty: The Role of Magical Thinking
Ayala Arad
Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics, December 2014, Pages 17–23
Abstract:
Previous studies have found evidence for the belief that actions which tempt fate increase the likelihood of negative outcomes. These included actions that presuppose a good outcome, that reflect hubris or that involve excessive risk taking. This paper explores a related form of magical thinking whereby individuals believe that asking for too much in situations of uncertainty may be punished by the universe and may decrease the probability of the desired outcome. It was found that many participants irrationally forgo the “greedy” option under uncertainty, even though it dominates other options and their behavior is not observed. It is suggested that some participants fear being magically punished for greediness and it is shown that the avoidance of greedy actions under uncertainty is related to the belief that one should not tempt fate. This phenomenon may have implications for various types of economic decisions such as charity donation, insurance purchase and bargaining.
----------------------
The hungry thief: Physiological deprivation and its effects on unethical behavior
Kai Chi Yam, Scott Reynolds & Jacob Hirsh
Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, forthcoming
Abstract:
We conducted five studies to examine the effects of physiological deprivation on unethical behavior. Consistent with predictions from Reinforcement Sensitivity Theory, we found that physiologically deprived participants engaged in unethical behavior related to obtaining physiological satiation. Contrary to models in which deprivation increases global unethical behavior, hungry and thirsty participants also engaged in less physiologically-unrelated unethical behavior compared to control participants (Studies 1–3). Studies 4 and 5 confirmed that the effects of physiological deprivation on both types of unethical behavior were mediated by a heightened engagement of the Behavioral Approach System (BAS). In addition, we found that the salience of an organizational ethical context acted as a boundary condition for the mediated effect. Participants reminded of the organizational ethical context were less likely to engage in need-related unethical behavior even when physiologically deprived. We conclude by considering the theoretical and practical implications of this research.
----------------------
“I have paid my dues”: When physical pain reduces interpersonal justice motivations
Lisanne van Bunderen & Brock Bastian
Motivation and Emotion, August 2014, Pages 540-546
Abstract:
In this study we show that experiencing physical pain interacts with justice related cognition and serves to reduce justice-restoring behavior in the context of interpersonal moral transgressions. This is because concepts of punishment and justice are embodied within the experience of pain, allowing for a sense of atonement from one’s wrongdoings. Two thirds of the participants were induced to feel that their performance in a two player game was unfair. Half of those participants were then asked to engage in a physically painful task, and were afterwards less likely to make amends for past poor performance compared to players who completed a similar, but non-painful task. This effect was only evident for participants who are particularly sensitive to personal injustices and therefore sensitive to the justice restoring qualities of pain.
----------------------
Deceiving yourself to better deceive high-status compared to equal-status others
Hui Jing Lu & Lei Chang
Evolutionary Psychology, Summer 2014, Pages 635-654
Abstract:
The arms race between deception and detection is likely to have played out between individuals in different status hierarchies, with low-status individuals more likely to be deceivers and high-status individuals more likely to be detectors than the other way around. Memory and its distortion may be temporarily employed first to keep truthful information away from both self and others and later to retrieve accurate information to benefit the self. Using a dual-retrieval paradigm, we tested the hypothesis that people are likely to deceive themselves to better deceive high- rather than equal-status others. College student participants were explicitly instructed (Study 1 and 2) or induced (Study 3) to deceive either a high-status teacher or an equal-status fellow student. When interacting with the high- but not equal-status target, participants in three studies genuinely remembered fewer previously studied items than they did on a second memory test alone without the deceiving target. The results support the view that self-deception responds to status hierarchy that registers probabilities of deception detection such that people are more likely to self-deceive high- rather than equal-status others.
----------------------
Pro-social behavior in the TV show “Come Dine with Me”: An empirical investigation
David Schüller et al.
Journal of Economic Psychology, December 2014, Pages 44–55
Abstract:
We investigate the influence of social approval, reputation, and individual characteristics on voting behavior in the German version of the TV show “Come Dine With Me”. Five contestants prepare a dinner for each other during the course of a week and evaluate each other’s performance. The winner receives a monetary prize. Evaluations remain concealed until the show is broadcast. Because actual voting behavior remains concealed during the show, a contestant could evaluate his/her opponents as zero in an effort to increase his/her own chances of winning, without risking later punishment in the form of low scores. However, this behavior is not observed in our dataset, which runs from 2006 to 2011. We find that all of the following have a significant influence on the evaluating behavior: the objective sophistication of a meal; the order of cooking; whether a person has already cooked; and the social similarity between contestant and evaluator. These findings help to improve understanding of the impact that reputation and social approval have on economic decision making.
----------------------
Matherine Kortenkamp & Colleen Moore
American Journal of Psychology, Fall 2014, Pages 367-382
Abstract:
Real-life moral dilemmas inevitably involve uncertainty, yet research has not considered how uncertainty affects utilitarian moral judgments. In addition, even though moral dilemma researchers regularly ask respondents, “What is appropriate?” but interpret it to mean, “What is moral?,” little research has examined whether a difference exists between asking these 2 types of questions. In this study, 140 college students read moral dilemmas that contained certain or uncertain consequences and then responded as to whether it was appropriate and whether it was moral to kill 1 to save many (a utilitarian choice). Ratings of the appropriateness and morality of the utilitarian choice were lower under uncertainty than certainty. A follow-up experiment found that these results could not be explained entirely by a change in the expected values of the outcomes or a desire to avoid the worst-case scenario. In addition, the utilitarian choice to kill 1 to save many was rated as more appropriate than moral. The results imply that moral decision making may depend critically on whether uncertainties in outcomes are admitted and whether people are asked about appropriateness or morality.
----------------------
“I Can’t Lie to Your Face”: Minimal Face-to-Face Interaction Promotes Honesty
Alex Van Zant & Laura Kray
Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, November 2014, Pages 234–238
Abstract:
Scholars have noted that face-to-face (FTF) interaction promotes honesty because it provides opportunities for conversation in which parties exchange information and build rapport. However, it is unclear whether FTF interaction promotes honesty even in the absence of opportunities for back-and-forth conversation. We hypothesized a minimal interaction effect whereby FTF interaction promotes honesty by increasing potential deceivers’ consideration of their own moral-interest. To test this account of how FTF interaction may promote honesty, we used a modified version of the deception game (Gneezy, 2005). We found that people were more honest when communicating FTF as opposed to through an intermediary. While FTF interaction tended to promote honesty irrespective of whether it occurred prior to or during the game, the effect was more pronounced when it occurred during the game. The effect of in-game communication medium was mediated by the activation of potential deceivers’ moral-interest. We also ruled out alternate accounts involving interpersonal liking, expected counterpart trust, and retaliation fear as honesty-promoting mechanisms. Furthermore, because these effects were not moderated by whether participants had been visually identified during a pre-game interaction, we suggest that our effects are distinct from theoretical accounts involving anonymity.
----------------------
Assigning economic value to people results in dehumanization brain response
Lasana Harris et al.
Journal of Neuroscience, Psychology, and Economics, September 2014, Pages 151-163
Abstract:
For a profit-maximizing rational agent, labor markets present a paradox: Economic contexts encourage exploitation of commodities whereas social contexts discourage exploitation of people and instead promote empathic responding and moral protection. This may result in irrational behavior. Perhaps rational agents reduce spontaneous social–cognitive responses to successfully maximize profits in a labor market. We tested this hypothesis by creating a labor market — an economic market where people serve as commodities. fMRI participants initially purchased players from a time-estimation skill labor market, then revalued these players based on performance in an attempt to maximize profit. Despite implementing a variety of purchasing strategies, we find that participants initially reduce activity in social cognition brain regions when viewing purchased players — an initial reduction consistent with a dehumanized brain response — that predicts later revaluation of purchased labor market players. However, traditional valuation regions in medial orbito-frontal cortex (MOFC) predict nonpurchased players’ revaluation. These results suggest valuation and social cognition brain regions independently guide revaluation processes when people are treated like commodities.
----------------------
The Selfish Side of Self-Control
Liad Uziel & Uri Hefetz
European Journal of Personality, forthcoming
Abstract:
Self-control is a powerful tool that promotes goal pursuit by helping individuals curb personal desires, follow norms, and adopt rational thinking. In interdependent social contexts, the socially acceptable (i.e. normative) and rational approach to secure long-term goals is prosocial behaviour. Consistent with that, much research associates self-control with prosociality. The present research demonstrates that when norm salience is reduced (i.e. social relations are no longer interdependent), high self-control leads to more selfish behaviour when it is economically rational. In three studies, participants were asked to allocate an endowment between themselves and another person (one-round, zero-sum version of the dictator game), facing a conflict between a socially normative and an economically rational approach. Across the studies, norm salience was manipulated [through manipulation of social context (private/public; Studies 1 and 2), measurement of social desirability (Studies 1 and 3), and measurement (Study 2) and manipulation (Study 3) of social power] such that some participants experienced low normative pressure. Findings showed that among individuals in a low normative pressure context, self-control led to economically rational, yet selfish, behaviour. The findings highlight the role of self-control in regulating behaviour so as to maximize situational adaptation.
----------------------
Anita Körner & Sabine Volk
Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, November 2014, Pages 139–145
Abstract:
Moral judgment research has been informed by both dual-process models and construal level theory. Combining these approaches, we argue that available processing capacity and construal level interact to predict moral judgment. Specifically, concrete construal should enhance visualization for spontaneous judgments, leading to stronger emotional reactions and more deontological decisions. In contrast, abstract construal should direct attention to abstract moral principles for deliberate judgments, again facilitating deontological decisions. In 3 experiments, we manipulated both construal level (abstract vs. concrete) and the availability of processing capacity (Experiment 1: via short vs. long deliberation time; Experiments 2 and 3: via cognitive vs. visual interference) and assessed moral dilemma judgments. Participants made more deontological judgments under concrete (vs. abstract) construal when processing capacity was reduced. With sufficient processing capacity, however, this pattern reversed, leading to more deontological judgments under abstract (vs. concrete) construal. These results extend previous work linking deontological decisions with emotional reactions, by suggesting an alternative pathway to deontology through abstract deliberation.