We show an interactive effect of perceiver-target similarity in ideological beliefs and target power on impressions of target morality. Consistent with prior research, perceivers rated targets with dissimilar ideologies as less moral than targets with similar ideologies, but this difference in ratings was magnified for powerful targets relative to less powerful targets. We argue that these results emerged because perceivers expected similar-ideology, powerful (vs. powerless) targets to help the self more, and expected dissimilar-ideology, powerful (vs. powerless) targets to hurt the self more. We establish this effect when people evaluate politicians (Study 1), groups, and individuals (Studies 2a-2b); demonstrate its predictive power over other kinds of interpersonal similarity; and show that it affects morality judgments uniquely when compared with other consequential dimensions of social evaluation. Finally, we manipulated power experimentally and showed the interaction when the difference between high- and low-power manipulations was controlled over just $1 (Studies 3-4).
AbeleA. E.BruckmüllerS. (2011). The bigger one of the “big two”? Preferential processing of communal information. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 47(5), 935–948. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2011.03.028
2.
AbeleA. E.WojciszkeB. (2014). Communal and agentic content in social cognition: A dual perspective model. In OlsonJ. M.ZannaM. P. (Eds.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 50, pp. 195–255). Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-800284-1.00004-7
3.
AikenL. S.WestS. G. (1991). Testing and interpreting interactions in multiple regression. Sage.
4.
American National Election Studies. (2015). ANES time series cumulative data file (1948–2012). Inter-University Consortium for Political and Social Research distributor. https://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR08475.v15
5.
BastianB.DensonT. F.HaslamN. (2013). The roles of dehumanization and moral outrage in retributive justice. PLOS ONE, 8(4), Article e61842. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0061842
6.
BocianK.BarylaW.KuleszaW. M.SchnallS.WojciszkeB. (2018). The mere liking effect: Attitudinal influences on attributions of moral character. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 79, 9–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2018.06.007
7.
BocianK.WojciszkeB. (2014). Self-interest bias in moral judgments of others’ actions. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 40(7), 898–909. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167214529800
8.
BrambillaM.LeachC. W. (2014). On the importance of being moral: The distinctive role of morality in social judgment. Social Cognition, 32(4), 397–408. https://doi.org/10.1521/soco.2014.32.4.397
9.
BrambillaM.RusconiP.SacchiS.CherubiniP. (2011). Looking for honesty: The primary role of morality (vs. sociability and competence) in information gathering. European Journal of Social Psychology, 41(2), 135–143. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.744
10.
BrambillaM.SacchiS.RusconiP.GoodwinG. P. (2021). The primacy of morality in impression development: Theory, research, and future directions. In GawronskiB. (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 64, pp. 187–262). Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/bs.aesp.2021.03.001
11.
BrandtM. J.CrawfordJ. T. (2020). Worldview conflict and prejudice. In GawronskiB. (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 61, pp. 1–66). Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/bs.aesp.2019.09.002
12.
CarrierA.DompnierB.YzerbytV. (2019). Of nice and mean: The personal relevance of others’ competence drives perceptions of warmth. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 45(11), 1549–1562. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0146167219835213
13.
CikaraM. (2021). Causes and consequences of coalitional cognition. In GawronskiB. (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 64, pp. 65–128). Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/bs.aesp.2021.04.002
CushmanF. (2008). Crime and punishment: Distinguishing the roles of causal and intentional analyses in moral judgment. Cognition, 108(2), 353–380. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2008.03.006
DépretE.FiskeS. T. (1993). Social cognition and power: Some cognitive consequences of social structure as a source of control deprivation. In WearyG.GleicherF.MarshK. L. (Eds.), Control motivation and social cognition (pp. 176–202). Springer.
18.
DorfmanR. (1979). A formula for the Gini coefficient. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 61(1), 146–149. https://doi.org/10.2307/1924845
19.
EllemersN.PagliaroS.BarretoM. (2013). Morality and behavioural regulation in groups: A social identity approach. European Review of Social Psychology, 24(1), 160–193. https://doi.org/10.1080/10463283.2013.841490
FiskeS. T.CuddyA. J.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
22.
GoodwinG. P.PiazzaJ.RozinP. (2014). Moral character predominates in person perception and evaluation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 106(1), 148–168. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/a0034726
23.
GreenP.MacLeodC. J. (2016). SIMR: An R package for power analysis of generalized linear mixed models by simulation. Methods in Ecology and Evolution, 7(4), 493–498. https://doi.org/10.1111/2041-210X.12504
24.
HaukeN.AbeleA. E. (2020). The impact of negative gossip on target and receiver. A “big two” analysis. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 42(2), 115–132. https://doi.org/10.1080/01973533.2019.1702881
25.
ImhoffR.KochA.FladeF. (2018). (Pre)occupations: A data-driven model of jobs and its consequences for categorization and evaluation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 77, 76–88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2018.04.001
26.
JenkinsA. C.KarashchukP.ZhuL.HsuM. (2018). Predicting human behavior toward members of different social groups. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 115(39), 9696–9701. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1719452115
27.
KochA.DorroughA.GlöcknerA.ImhoffR. (2020). The ABC of society: Perceived similarity in agency/socioeconomic success and conservative-progressive beliefs increases intergroup cooperation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 90, Article 103996. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2020.103996
28.
KochA.ImhoffR.DotschR.UnkelbachC.AlvesH. (2016). The ABC of stereotypes about groups: Agency/socioeconomic success, conservative–progressive beliefs, and communion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 110(5), 675–709. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/pspa0000046
29.
KochA.ImhoffR.UnkelbachC.NicolasG.FiskeS.TeracheJ.CarrierA.YzerbytV. (2020). Groups’ warmth is a personal matter: Understanding consensus on stereotype dimensions reconciles adversarial models of social evaluation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 89, Article 103995. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2020.103995
30.
KochA.KervynN.KervynM.ImhoffR. (2018). Studying the cognitive map of the U.S. States: Ideology and prosperity stereotypes predict interstate prejudice. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 9(5), 530–538. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550617715070
31.
KochA.YzerbytV.AbeleA.EllemersN.FiskeS. T. (2021). Social evaluation: Comparing models across interpersonal, intragroup, intergroup, several-group, and many-group contexts. In GawronskiB. (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 63, pp. 1–68). Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/bs.aesp.2020.11.001
32.
KrosnickJ. A.JuddC. M.WittenbrinkB. (2005). Attitude measurement. In AlbarracinD.JohnsonB. T.ZannaM. P. (Eds.), Handbook of attitudes and attitude change (pp. 21–76). Erlbaum.
33.
LandyJ. F.PiazzaJ.GoodwinG. P. (2016). When it’s bad to be friendly and smart: The desirability of sociability and competence depends on morality. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 42(9), 1272–1290. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0146167216655984
34.
LeachC. W.EllemersN.BarretoM. (2007). Group virtue: the importance of morality (vs. competence and sociability) in the positive evaluation of in-groups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93(2), 234–249. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/0022-3514.93.2.234
35.
MageeJ. C.SmithP. K. (2013). The social distance theory of power. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 17(2), 158–186. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868312472732
MontoyaR. M.HortonR. S.KirchnerJ. (2008). Is actual similarity necessary for attraction? A meta-analysis of actual and perceived similarity. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 25(6), 889–922. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0265407508096700
38.
NicolasG.FiskeS. T.KochA.ImhoffR.UnkelbachC.TeracheJ.CarrierA.YzerbytV. (2022). Relational versus structural goals prioritize different social information. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 122(4), 659–682. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspi0000366
39.
PinsofD.SearsD. O.HaseltonM. G. (2023). Strange bedfellows: The alliance theory of political belief systems. Psychological Inquiry, 34(3), 139–160. https://doi.org/10.1080/1047840X.2023.2274433
40.
RussellA. M.FiskeS. T. (2010). Power and social perception. In GuinoteA.VescioT. K. (Eds.) The social psychology of power (pp. 231–250). Guilford Press.
41.
SlepianM. L.KochA. (2021). Identifying the dimensions of secrets to reduce their harms. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 120(6), 1431–1456. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspa0000202
42.
ThibautJ. W.KelleyH. H. (1959). The social psychology of groups. Wiley.
Van ProoijenA. M.EllemersN. (2015). Does it pay to be moral? How indicators of morality and competence enhance organizational and work team attractiveness. British Journal of Management, 26(2), 225–236. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8551.12055
WingenT.DohleS. (2021). Exploring negative beliefs about power: The role of autonomy and influence. Social Psychology, 52(4), 250–263. https://doi.org/10.1027/1864-9335/a000453
47.
WoitzelJ.KochA. (2023). Ideological prejudice is stronger in ideological extremists (vs. moderates). Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 26(8), 1685–1705. https://doi.org/10.1177/13684302221135083
48.
WojciszkeB.BazinskaR.JaworskiM. (1998). On the dominance of moral categories in impression formation. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 24(12), 1251–1263. https://doi.org/10.1177/01461672982412001
49.
ZornT. J.MataA.AlvesH. (2022). Attitude similarity and interpersonal liking: A dominance of positive over negative attitudes. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 100, Article 104281. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2021.104281
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.
