Sketchy
Softening the blow or sharpening the blade: Examining the reputational effects of satire
Hooria Jazaieri & Derek Rucker
Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, forthcoming
Abstract:
Criticism is foundational to the fabric of society and can directly impact people's reputations. Although criticism takes many forms, one prevalent form of criticism is satire-the coupling of criticism with humor. While the lighthearted and playful nature of satire has been argued to render it innocuous, the present research suggests that satire can in some cases be more incendiary than direct criticism. First, a naturalistic study examines nonpolitical satirical versus critical YouTube videos. Participants (N = 1,311) evaluated a criticized individual more negatively following satire compared to direct criticism. Moreover, when conducting automated text analysis of the actual comments left by viewers on YouTube (N = 104,555), people used more dehumanizing language in response to satirical versus critical videos. In six subsequent lab experiments (N = 2,040) using memes and videos, causal evidence is provided that nonpolitical satire can cause greater damage to a target's reputation than direct criticism. Evidence that satire renders targets as less human, and thus more prone to more reputational damage is explored via both mediation and moderation.
Failing to express emotion on 911 calls triggers suspicion through violating expectations and moral typecasting
Jessica Salerno et al.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, forthcoming
Abstract:
Coming to suspect that someone has engaged in wrongdoing based on their unexpected behavior is a common phenomenon -- yet, little is known about what triggers initial suspicion. We investigated how violating expectations for high emotionality during a traumatic event can trigger suspicion that one has engaged in immoral -- or even criminal -- activity through moral typecasting. Five studies demonstrate this theory in a criminal context with dire real-world consequences: 911 callers reporting violent crimes generating suspicion by exhibiting unexpected behavior, which could trigger confirmation bias in investigations leading to wrongful convictions. Using both real and tightly controlled simulated 911 calls, we demonstrated that failing to express the expected level of emotion on a 911 call reporting a violent crime led laypeople and police to morally typecast the caller as more of a moral agent capable of perpetrating immoral acts and less of a moral patient capable of being the victim of immoral acts -- ultimately increasing suspicion that they were involved in the crime and support for treating them as a suspect. We advance moral psychological theory by demonstrating that failing to express expected levels of emotion about a moral violation can shape moral inferences about someone's capacity to commit versus be the victim of moral wrongs, thereby generating suspicion that they might have engaged in wrongdoing. We demonstrated this theory in criminal settings to explain how one tragedy can become two: altruistic witnesses calling 911 to plead for help on behalf of another person becoming suspects of the crime they reported because they failed to exhibit the expected emotional demeanor.
Are moral people happier? Answers from reputation-based measures of moral character
Jessie Sun, Wen Wu & Geoffrey Goodwin
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, forthcoming
Abstract:
Philosophers have long debated whether moral virtue contributes to happiness or whether morality and happiness are in conflict. Yet, little empirical research directly addresses this question. Here, we examined the association between reputation-based measures of everyday moral character (operationalized as a composite of widely accepted moral virtues such as compassion, honesty, and fairness) and self-reported well-being across two cultures. In Study 1, close others reported on U.S. undergraduate students' moral character (two samples; Ns = 221/286). In Study 2, Chinese employees (N = 711) reported on their coworkers' moral character and their own well-being. To better sample the moral extremes, in Study 3, U.S. participants nominated "targets" who were among the most moral, least moral, and morally average people they personally knew. Targets (N = 281) self-reported their well-being and nominated informants who provided a second, continuous measure of the targets' moral character. These studies showed that those who are more moral in the eyes of close others, coworkers, and acquaintances generally experience a greater sense of subjective well-being and meaning in life. These associations were generally robust when controlling for key demographic variables (including religiosity) and informant-reported liking. There were no significant differences in the strength of the associations between moral character and well-being across two major subdimensions of both moral character (kindness and integrity) and well-being (subjective well-being and meaning in life). Together, these studies provide the most comprehensive evidence to date of a positive and general association between everyday moral character and well-being.
Cheat, cheat, repeat: On the consistency of dishonest behavior in structurally comparable situations
Isabel Thielmann et al.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, forthcoming
Abstract:
A fundamental assumption about human behavior forming the backbone of trait theories is that, to some extent, individuals behave consistently across structurally comparable situations. However, especially for unethical behavior, the consistency assumption has been severely questioned, at least from the early 19th century onward. We provide a strict test of the consistency assumption for a prominent instance of unethical behavior -- dishonesty -- in a large (N = 1,916) and demographically diverse sample. Dishonest behavior was measured three times -- up to 3 years apart -- using different variants of well-established, incentivized cheating paradigms. A key advantage of these paradigms is that lying is individually profitable but not self-incriminating. Besides varying the specific task at hand, we experimentally varied the nature of incentives (i.e., money vs. avoiding tedious work) as well as their magnitude across measurement occasions. The consistency of dishonest behavior was estimated using a newly developed statistical model. Results showed strong consistency of dishonest behavior across contexts in most cases. Furthermore, theoretically relevant personality traits (i.e., Honesty-Humility and the Dark Factor) yielded meaningful relations both with dishonesty and indeed its consistency. Thus, contrary to long-standing assumptions, there is notable consistency in dishonest behavior that can be attributed to underlying dispositional factors. Overall, the current findings have important implications for the theoretical understanding of dishonest behavior by providing strong evidence for (dis)honesty as a trait as well as for practice (e.g., honesty interventions). Moreover, the newly developed statistical approach can serve future research across scientific fields.
Reluctance to Downplay: Asymmetric Sensitivity to Differences in the Severity of Moral Transgressions
Amanda Geiser, Ike Silver & Deborah Small
Psychological Science, forthcoming
Abstract:
A common-sense moral intuition is that bad acts should be condemned according to severity. Yet seven experiments (N = 6,075 U.S. adults) show that the extent to which people differentiate between transgressions hinges on the direction of comparison. When scaling up from a less severe transgression to a more severe one, people readily express stronger condemnation of the worse transgression. But when scaling down from a more severe transgression to a less severe one, they differentiate less, often condemning the lesser transgression just as strongly as one that is transparently worse. Indicating that one transgression is less bad than another can be construed as downplaying such transgressions, signaling bad moral character. Supporting this account, the asymmetry is larger for judgments that implicate moral character and for transgressions that seem especially important to condemn. Observers' moral-character judgments reveal a similar pattern, suggesting that the asymmetry is reinforced by social incentives.
When Breaking the Law Gets You the Job: Evidence from the Electronic Dance Music Community
Xu Li & Amandine Ody-Brasier
Administrative Science Quarterly, forthcoming
Abstract:
Why would a law-abiding occupational community support members engaged in legally prohibited actions? We propose that lawbreaking can elicit informal support when it is construed as a disinterested action -- intended to serve the community rather than the perpetrator. We study how illegal remixing ("bootlegging") affects an artist's ability to secure opening act and other performance opportunities in the electronic dance music (EDM) community, whose members endorse the substance of copyright law but whose norms about bootlegging are ambiguous. Data on 38,784 disc jockeys (DJs) across 97 countries over 10 years reveal that producing bootlegs is associated with more opportunities to perform, compared to producing official remixes or original music. This effect disappears when community members view bootlegging as a self-serving action -- primarily designed to benefit the perpetrator. An online experiment and an expert survey rule out the possibility that bootlegs are considered more creative, of higher quality, or better able to attract attention. We shed additional light on our proposed mechanism by analyzing data from 34 interviews with EDM professionals. This helps us to explain how a lawbreaker can paradoxically be perceived as serving the community, thereby eliciting active community support for their action.
Intellectual Humility Predicts Empathic Accuracy and Empathic Resilience
Michal Lehmann et al.
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, forthcoming
Abstract:
Three preregistered studies (N = 533) investigated the relationship between intellectual humility (IH) and cognitive and emotional empathy. Study 1 (n = 212) revealed a positive association between IH and empathic accuracy (EA), especially toward the outgroup. Study 2 (n = 112) replicated the significant association between IH and EA. Study 3 (n = 209) employed a manipulation to enhance IH to demonstrate causality. We found evidence for an indirect effect, wherein the manipulation increased state IH, which was associated with greater EA. A mini meta-analysis revealed that, on average, individuals with higher levels of IH exhibit increased EA, showing a greater understanding of others' emotional states. Moreover, IH predicts empathic resilience -- buffering against personal distress while maintaining or increasing empathic concern for others. These findings highlight the positive influence of IH on empathy, emphasizing its potential for fostering deeper connections and better understanding in social interactions.