The amount of effort required to bring about a prosocial outcome can vary from low—handing a stranger the wallet she just dropped—to high—spending days tracking down the owner of a lost wallet. The goal of the current research is to characterize the relationship between prosocial effort and moral character judgments. Does more prosocial effort always lead to rosier moral character judgments? Across four studies (N = 1,658), we find that moral character judgments increase with prosocial effort to a point and then plateau. We find evidence that this pattern is produced, in part, by descriptive and prescriptive norms: exceeding descriptive norms increases moral character judgments, but exceeding prescriptive norms has the opposite effect, which leads to a tapering off of moral character judgments at higher levels of effort.
AmesD. R.FlynnF. J. (2007). What breaks a leader: The curvilinear relation between assertiveness and leadership. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92(2), 307–324. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.92.2.307
2.
Aristotle. (1999). Nicomachean ethics (RossW. D., Trans.). Batoche Books.
3.
AronsonE.MillsJ. (1959). The effect of severity of initiation on liking for a group. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 59(2), 177–181. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0047195
4.
BalduzziS.RückerG.SchwarzerG. (2019). How to perform a meta-analysis with R: a practical tutorial. Evidence-Based Mental Health, 22, 153–160. https://doi.org/10.1136/ebmental-2019-300117
5.
BatesD.MächlerM.BolkerB. M.WalkerS. C. (2015). Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software, 67(1), 1–48. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v067.i01
6.
BazermanM. H.MooreD. A.TenbrunselA. E.Wade-BenzoniK. A.BlountS. (1999). Explaining how preferences change across joint versus separate evaluation. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 39(1), 41–58. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0167-2681(99)00025-6
7.
BigmanY. E.TamirM. (2016). The road to heaven is paved with effort: Perceived effort amplifies moral judgment. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 145(12), 1654–1669. https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0000230
8.
BolinoM. C.TurnleyW. H.HarveyJ. (2013). Exploring the dark side of organizational citizenship behavior. Article in Journal of Organizational Behavior, 34, 542–559. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.1847
9.
BondC. F.OmarA.PitreU.LashleyB. R.SkaggsL. M.KirkC. T. (1992). Fishy-looking liars: Deception judgment from expectancy violation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63(6), 969–977. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.63.6.969
10.
BurgmerP.ForstmannM.StavrovaO. (2019). Ideas are cheap: When and why adults value labor over ideas. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 148(5), 824–844. https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0000473
11.
ClarkH. H.SchoberM. F. (1992). Asking questions and influencing answers. In TanurJ. M. (Ed.), Questions about questions: Inquiries into the cognitive bases of surveys (pp. 15–48). Russell Sage Foundation. https://psycnet.apa.org/record/1992-97329-001
12.
CritcherC. R.InbarY.PizarroD. A. (2013). How quick decisions illuminate moral character. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 4(3), 308–315. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550612457688
13.
EverettJ. A. C.PizarroD. A.CrockettM. J. (2016). Inference of trustworthiness from intuitive moral judgments. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 145(6), 772–787. https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0000165
14.
FaulF.ErdfelderE.BuchnerA.LangA. G. (2009). Statistical power analyses using G*Power 3.1: Tests for correlation and regression analyses. Behavior Research Methods, 41, 1149–1160. https://doi.org/10.3758/BRM.41.4.1149
FiskeS. T.CuddyA. J. C.GlickP.XuJ. (2002). A model of (often mixed) stereotype content: Competence and warmth respectively follow from perceived status and competition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82(6), 878–902. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.82.6.878
17.
FurnhamA. (1984). The protestant work ethic: A review of the psychological literature. European Journal of Social Psychology, 14(1), 87–104. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2420140108
18.
GoodwinG. P.PiazzaJ.RozinP. (2014). Moral character predominates in person perception and evaluation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 106(1), 148–168. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0034726
HardyM. A. (1993). Regression with dummy variables. SAGE.
21.
HesterN.GrayK. (2020). The moral psychology of raceless, genderless strangers. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 15(2), 216–230. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691619885840
22.
HipplerH.-J.SchwarzN. (1987). Response effects in surveys. In HipplerH.-J.SchwarzN.SudmanS. (Eds.), Social information processing and survey methodology (pp. 102–122). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4612-4798-2_6
23.
HseeC. K. (1996). The evaluability hypothesis: An explanation for preference reversals between joint and separate evaluations of alternatives. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 67(3), 247–257. https://doi.org/10.1006/obhd.1996.0077
24.
HseeC. K.BlountS.LoewensteinG. F.BazermanM. H. (1999). Preference reversals between joint and separate evaluations of options: A review and theoretical analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 125(5), 576–590. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.125.5.576
KleinN.EpleyN. (2014). The topography of generosity: Asymmetric evaluations of prosocial actions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 143(6), 2366–2379. https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0000025
27.
KleinN.GrossmanI.UskulA.KrausA.EpleyN. (2015). It pays to be nice, but not really nice: Asymmetric reputations from prosociality across 7 countries. Judgment and Decision Making, 10(4), 355–364. https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2015-54495-006
KuznetsovaA.BrockhoffP. B.ChristensenR. H. B. (2017). lmerTest package: Tests in linear mixed effects models. Journal of Statistical Software, 82(13), 1–26. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v082.i13
30.
LawnE. C. R.SmillieL. D.PachecoL. B.LahamS. M. (2022). From ordinary to extraordinary: A roadmap for studying the psychology of moral exceptionality. Current Opinion in Psychology, 43, 329–334. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2021.08.002
31.
LeventhalH.SingerR.JonesS. (1965). Effects of fear and specificity of recommendation upon attitudes and behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2(1), 20–29. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0022089
32.
LevineE. E.SchweitzerM. E. (2014). Are liars ethical? On the tension between benevolence and honesty. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 53, 107–117. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2014.03.005
33.
LucasB. J.GalinksyA. D.MurnighanK. J. (2016). An intention-based account of perspective-taking: Why perspective-taking can both decrease and increase moral condemnation. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 42(11), 1480–1489. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167216664057
34.
MacKinnonD. P.KrullJ. L.LockwoodC. M. (2000). Equivalence of the mediation, confounding and suppression effect. Prevention Science, 1(4), 173–181. https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1026595011371
MinsonJ. A.MoninB. (2012). Do-gooder derogation: Disparaging morally motivated minorities to defuse anticipated reproach. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 3(2), 200–207. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550611415695
37.
MoninB.SawyerP. J.MarquezM. J. (2008). The rejection of moral rebels: Resenting those who do the right thing. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95(1), 76–93. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.95.1.76
38.
NewmanG. E.CainD. M. (2014). Tainted altruism: When doing some good is evaluated as worse than doing not good at all. Psychological Science, 25(3), 648–655. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797613504785
39.
NortonM. I.MochonD.ArielyD. (2012). The IKEA effect: When labor leads to love. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 22(3), 453–460. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JCPS.2011.08.002
40.
OlivolaC. Y.ShafirE. (2013). The martyrdom effect: When pain and effort increase prosocial contributions. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 26(1), 91–105. https://doi.org/10.1002/bdm.767
RobinsonJ. S.Page-GouldE.PlaksJ. E. (2017). I appreciate your effort: Asymmetric effects of actors’ exertion on observers’ consequentialist versus deontological judgments. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 73, 50–64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2017.06.005
43.
RosseelY. (2012). Lavaan: An R package for structural equation modeling. Journal of Statistical Software, 48(1), 1–36. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v048.i02
SimonsD. J.ShodaY.LindsayD. S. (2017). Constraints on Generality (COG): A proposed addition to all empirical papers. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 12(6), 1123–1128. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691617708630
46.
StoutenJ.van DijkeM.MayerD. M.De CremerD.EuwemaM. C. (2013). Can a leader be seen as too ethical? The curvilinear effects of ethical leadership. Leadership Quarterly, 24(5), 680–695. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2013.05.002
TasimiA.DominguezA.WynnK. (2015). Do-gooder derogation in children: The social costs of generosity. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, Article 1036. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01036
49.
TsayC. J.ShuL. L.BazermanM. H. (2011). Naïveté and cynicism in negotiations and other competitive contexts. The Academy of Management Annals, 5(1), 495–518. https://doi.org/10.1080/19416520.2011.587283
50.
WalmsleyJ.O’MadagainC. (2020). The worst-motive fallacy: A negativity bias in motive attribution. Psychological Science, 31(11), 1430–1438. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797620954492
51.
ZlatevJ. J.KuporD. M.LaurinK.MillerD. T. (2019). Being “good” or “good enough”: Prosocial risk and the structure of moral self-regard. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 118, 242–253. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspa0000175
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
