Reporting a close-other to authorities can save lives from extreme deviant behaviors but it also poses a dilemma as gatekeepers struggle between their relationship and societal obligations. We propose and test a multi-goal, multi-action, cognitive-affective model to elucidate this decision-making process. Across various contexts (hate crimes, problem gambling, and violent extremism), gatekeepers’ motivational strength to report and not report their close-other and their anticipated regret toward both actions simultaneously contributed to the variance of reporting intentions (30–70%). Notably, a future time perspective increased reporting intentions by elevating the motivational strength of all societal obligations (e.g., concern for innocent others) and one relationship obligation (helping the close-other). Our findings suggest that a more balanced weighting underlies the multi-goal dynamic of dilemmatic decision-making, and that the reporting decision is a nuanced blend of concerns for both societal welfare and the well-being of loved ones. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed.
AjzenI.FishbeinM. (2008). Scaling and testing multiplicative combinations in the Expectancy–Value model of attitudes. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 38(9), 2222–2247. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.2008.00389.x
2.
AlbarracínD.SunderrajanA.DaiW.WhiteB. X. (2019). The social creation of action and inaction: From concepts to goals to behaviors. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 223–271. https://doi.org/10.1016/bs.aesp.2019.04.001
3.
AtkinsonJ. W. (1957). Motivational determinants of risk taking behavior. Psychological Review, 64, 359–372.
4.
BąkowskiP. (2023). (rep.). United States: Domestic violent extremism on the rise (pp. 1–12). European Union.
5.
BallietD.FerrisD. L. (2013). Ostracism and prosocial behavior: A social dilemma perspective. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 120(2), 298–308. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2012.04.004
6.
BennisW. M.MedinD. L.BartelsD. M. (2010). The costs and benefits of calculation and moral rules. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 5(2), 187–202. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691610362354
7.
BordersA.EarleywineM.HueyS. J. (2004). Predicting problem behaviors with multiple expectancies: Expanding expectancy-value theory. Adolescence, 39(155), 539.
8.
BrehautJ. C.O’ConnorA. M.WoodT. J.HackT. F.SiminoffL.GordonE.Feldman-StewartD. (2003). Validation of a decision regret scale. Medical Decision Making, 23(4), 281–292. https://doi.org/10.1177/0272989x03256005
9.
BrewerN. T.DeFrankJ. T.GilkeyM. B. (2016). Anticipated regret and health behavior: A meta-analysis. Health Psychology, 35(11), 1264–1275. https://doi.org/10.1037/hea0000294
10.
CheungM. W. L.ChanW. (2009). A two-stage approach to synthesizing covariance matrices in meta-analytic structural equation modeling. Structural Equation Modeling, 16, 28–53. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705510802561295
11.
EcclesJ. (1983). Expectancies, values and academic behaviors. In SpenceJ. T. (Ed.), Achievement and achievement motives: Psychological and sociological approaches (pp. 75–146). San Francisco, CA: Free man.
12.
FiedlerK.HarrisC.SchottM. (2018). Unwarranted inferences from statistical mediation tests – an analysis of articles published in 2015. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 75, 95–102. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2017.11.008
13.
GibbonsF. X.HoulihanA. E.GerrardM. (2009). Reason and reaction: The utility of a dual-focus, dual-processing perspective on promotion and prevention of adolescent health risk behaviour. British Journal of Health Psychology, 14(2), 231–248. https://doi.org/10.1348/135910708X376640
GrossmanM. (2015). Community reporting thresholds: Sharing information with authorities concerning violent extremist activity and involvement in foreign conflict. Countering Violent Extremism Subcommittee, Australia-New Zealand Counter-Terrorism Committee.
17.
HughesJ. S. (2017). In a moral dilemma, choose the one you love: Impartial actors are seen as less moral than partial ones. British Journal of Social Psychology, 56(3), 561–577. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjso.12199
18.
JoiremanJ.ShafferM. J.BallietD. P.StrathmanA. (2012). Promotion orientation explains why future-oriented people exercise and eat healthy: Evidence from the two-factor consideration of future consequences-14 scale. Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin, 38(10), 1272–1287. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167212449362
19.
KirkD.PapachristosA. (2011). Cultural mechanisms and the persistence of neighborhood violence. American Journal of Sociology, 116, 1190–1233.
20.
KlineR. B. (1998). Software review: Software programs for structural equation modeling: Amos, EQS, and LISREL. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 16(4), 343–364. https://doi.org/10.1177/073428299801600407
21.
KooijD. T.KanferR.BettsM.RudolphC. W. (2018). Future time perspective: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 103(8), 867–893. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000306
22.
KopetzC.StarnesW. (2023). A goal systems approach to risk behavior. In KruglanskiA. W.FishbachA.KopetzC. (Eds.), Goal Systems Theory: Psychological Processes and Applications (pp. 25–54). Oxford Academic. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780197687468.003.0003
23.
KruglanskiA. W.GelfandM. J.BélangerJ. J.ShevelandA.HetiarachchiM.GunaratnaR. (2014). The psychology of radicalization and deradicalization: How significance quest impacts violent extremism. Political Psychology, 35(S1), 69–93. https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.12163
24.
KruglanskiA. W.ShahJ. Y.FishbachA.FriedmanR.ChunW. Y.Sleeth-KepplerD. (2002). A theory of goal-systems. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 34, 311–3s78.
25.
LivingstoneA. G.HaslamS. A.PostmesT.JettenJ. (2011). “We are, therefore we should”: Evidence that in-group identification mediates the acquisition of in-group norms. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 41(8), 1857–1876. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.2011.00794.x
26.
MagidsonJ. F.RobertsB. W.Collado-RodriguezA.LejuezC. W. (2014). Theory-driven intervention for changing personality: Expectancy value theory, behavioral activation, and conscientiousness. Developmental Psychology, 50(5), 1442–1450. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0030583
27.
MarquesJ. M.YzerbytV. Y.LeyensJ. (1988). The “Black sheep effect”: Extremity of judgments toward ingroup members as a function of group identification. European Journal of Social Psychology, 18(1), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2420180102
28.
NenkovG.InmanJ.HullandJ. (2008). Considering the future: The conceptualization and measurement of elaboration on potential outcomes. The Journal of Consumer Research, 35(1), 126–141. https://doi.org/10.1086/525504
29.
OrbellS.HaggerM. (2006). Temporal framing and the decision to take part in type 2 diabetes screening: Effects of individual differences in consideration of future consequences on persuasion. Health Psychology, 25(4), 537–548. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-6133.25.4.537
30.
PetersonJ.DensleyJ. A. (2022). The violence project: How to stop a mass shooting epidemic. Abrams Press.
31.
R Core Team (2020). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. https://www.R-project.org/.
32.
RichardR.de VriesN. K.van der PligtJ. (1998). Anticipated regret and precautionary sexual behavior. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 28, 1411–1428.
33.
RivisA.SheeranP.ArmitageC. J. (2009). Expanding the affective and normative components of the theory of planned behavior: A meta-analysis of anticipated affect and moral norms. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 39(12), 2985–3019. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.2009.00558.x
34.
RoccasS.KlarY.LiviatanI. (2006). The paradox of group-based guilt: Modes of national identification, conflict vehemence, and reactions to the in-group’s moral violations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 91(4), 698–711. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.91.4.698
RosseelY. (2012). Lavaan: An R package for structural equation modeling. Journal of Statistical Software, 48, 1–36.
37.
SandbergT.ConnerM. (2008). Anticipated regret as an additional predictor in the theory of planned behaviour: A meta-analysis. British Journal of Social Psychology, 47(4), 589–606. https://doi.org/10.1348/014466607x258704
38.
SandbergT.ConnerM. (2009). A mere measurement effect for anticipated regret: Impacts on cervical screening attendance. British Journal of Social Psychology, 48, 221–236.
39.
ScheinC.GrayK. (2018). The theory of dyadic morality: Reinventing moral judgment by redefining harm. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 22(1), 32–70. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868317698288
40.
SchillerB.BaumgartnerT.KnochD. (2014). Intergroup bias in third-party punishment stems from both ingroup favoritism and outgroup discrimination. Evolution and Human Behavior, 35, 169–175.
41.
SchönbrodtF. D.PeruginiM. (2013). At what sample size do correlations stabilize?Journal of Research in Personality, 47(5), 609–612. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2013.05.009
42.
ShangC.MossA. C.ChenA. (2023). The expectancy-value theory: A meta-analysis of its application in Physical Education. Journal of Sport and Health Science, 12(1), 52–64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jshs.2022.01.003
43.
SimmonsJ. P.NelsonL. D.SimonsohnU. (2013, January17–19). Life after P-Hacking. Meeting of the Society for Personality and Social Psychology, New Orleans, LA. https://ssrn.com/abstract=2205186
SniehottaF. F.PresseauJ.Araújo-SoaresV. (2014). Time to retire the theory of planned behaviour. Health Psychology Review, 8(1), 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1080/17437199.2013.869710
46.
SpencerS. J.ZannaM. P.FongG. T. (2005). Establishing a causal chain: Why experiments are often more effective than mediational analyses in examining psychological processes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89(6), 845–851. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.89.6.845
47.
StrathmanA.GleicherF.BoningerD. S.EdwardsC. S. (1994). The consideration of future consequences: Weighing immediate and distant outcomes of behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66, 742–752. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.66.4.742
48.
TajfelH.TurnerJ. C. (2004). The social identity theory of intergroup behavior. Key readings in social psychology. In JostJ. T.SidaniusJ. (Eds.), Political psychology: Key readings, Key readings in social psychology (pp. 276–293). Psychology Press.
49.
TedeschiR. G.Shakespeare-FinchJ.TakuK. (2018). Post-traumatic growth: Theory, research and applications. Taylor and Francis.
50.
ThomasP.GrossmanM.MiahS.ChristmannK. (2017). Community report thresholds. Centre for Research and Evidence on Security Threats.
WaytzA.DunganJ.YoungL. (2013). The whistleblower’s dilemma and the fairness–loyalty tradeoff. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 49(6), 1027–1033. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2013.07.002
53.
WeidmanA. C.SowdenW. J.BergM. K.KrossE. (2019). Punish or protect? How close relationships shape responses to moral violations. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 46(5), 693–708. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167219873485
54.
WilliamsM. J.HorganJ. G.EvansW. P. (2016). The critical role of friends in networks for countering violent extremism: toward a theory of vicarious help-seeking. Behavioral Sciences of Terrorism and Political Aggression, 8(1), 45–65.
55.
ZeelenbergM.PietersR. (2007). A theory of regret regulation 1.0. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 17, 3–18.
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.
