The present research investigated the emotional, interpersonal, and impression-updating consequences of witnessing events that violate the moral character impressions people hold of others. Across three studies, moral character violations predicted broad disruptions to participants’ sense of meaning, confidence judging moral character, and expectations of others’ moral characters. Participants who were in real life closer to perpetrators, directly victimized, and higher in preferences for closure and behavioral stability reported more negative outcomes. Moreover, experimental manipulations showed that character violations lead to worse outcomes than the comparable experience of encountering consistently immoral others. The authors discuss implications for research on moral perception and meaning, as well as on understanding responses to everyday revelations about people’s characters.
AbeleA. E.WojciszkeB. (2007). Agency and communion from the perspective of self versus others. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93(5), 751–763. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.93.5.751
2.
AdamsG. S.InesiM. E. (2016). Impediments to forgiveness: Victim and transgressor attributions of intent and guilt. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 111(6), 866–881. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspi0000070
3.
BloomP. (2011). Family, community, trolley problems, and the crisis in moral psychology. The Yale Review, 99(2), 26–43.
4.
BrambillaM.SacchiS.PagliaroS.EllemersN. (2013). Morality and intergroup relations: Threats to safety and group image predict the desire to interact with outgroup and ingroup members. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 49(5), 811–821. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2013.04.005
5.
BrambillaM.SacchiS.RusconiP.CherubiniP.YzerbytV. Y. (2012). You want to give a good impression? Be honest! Moral traits dominate group impression formation. British Journal of Social Psychology, 51(1), 149–166. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8309.2010.02011.x
6.
ChristyA. G.KimJ.VessM.SchlegelR. J.HicksJ. A. (2017). The reciprocal relationship between perceptions of moral goodness and knowledge of others’ true selves. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 8(8), 910–917. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550617693061
7.
CottrellC. A.NeubergS. L.LiN. P. (2007). What do people desire in others? A sociofunctional perspective on the importance of different valued characteristics. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92(2), 208–231. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.92.2.208
8.
De BruinE. N. M.Van LangeP. A. M. (2000). What people look for in others: Influences of the perceiver and the perceived on information selection. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26(2), 206–219. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167200264007
9.
De FreitasJ.CikaraM.GrossmannI.SchlegelR. (2017). Origins of the belief in good true selves. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 21(9), 634–636. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2017.05.009
10.
DohertyK. T. (1998). A mind of her own: Effects of need for closure and gender on reactions to nonconformity. Sex Roles, 38(9), 801–819. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1018825231362
11.
DunbarR. I. M. (1993). Coevolution of neocortical size, group size and language in humans. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 16(4), 681–735. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00032325
12.
DweckC. S.ChiuC.HongY. (1995). Implicit theories and their role in judgments and reactions: A world from two perspectives. Psychological Inquiry, 6(4), 267–285. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327965pli0604
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
15.
Harmon-JonesE.AmodioD. M.Harmon-JonesC. (2009). Action-based model of dissonance: A review, integration, and expansion of conceptions of cognitive conflict. In ZannaM. P. (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 41, pp. 119–166). Elsevier Academic Press.
16.
HarrisL. T.FiskeS. T. (2010). Neural regions that underlie reinforcement learning are also active for social expectancy violations. Social Neuroscience, 5(1), 76–91. https://doi.org/10.1080/17470910903135825
17.
HartleyA. G.FurrR. M.HelzerE. G.JayawickremeE.VelasquezK. R.FleesonW. (2016). Morality’s centrality to liking, respecting, and understanding others. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 7(7), 648–657. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550616655359
18.
HeineS. J.ProulxT.VohsK. D. (2006). The meaning maintenance model: On the coherence of social motivations. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 10(2), 88–110. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327957pspr1002_1
19.
HeiphetzL. (2019). Moral essentialism and generosity among children and adults. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 148(12), 2077–2090. https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0000587
20.
HofmannW.BrandtM. J.WisneskiD. C.RockenbachB.SkitkaL. J. (2018). Moral punishment in everyday life. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 44(12), 1697–1711. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167218775075
21.
HutchersonC. A.GrossJ. J. (2011). The moral emotions: A social-functionalist account of anger, disgust, and contempt. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 100(4), 719–737. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0022408
22.
Janoff-BulmanR. (1992). Shattered assumptions: Towards a new psychology of trauma. Free Press.
23.
Janoff-BulmanR. (2013). Meaning and morality: A natural coupling. In MarkmanK. D.ProulxT.LindbergM. J. (Eds.), The psychology of meaning (pp. 191–213). American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/14040-010
24.
JordanJ. J.SommersR.BloomP.RandD. G. (2017). Why do we hate hypocrites? Evidence for a theory of false signaling. Psychological Science, 28(3), 356–368. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797616685771
25.
KoehlerJ. J.GershoffA. D. (2003). Betrayal aversion: When agents of protection become agents of harm. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 90(2), 244–261. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0749-5978(02)00518-6
26.
LandauM. J.JohnsM.GreenbergJ.MartensA.PyszczynskiT.GoldenbergJ. L.SolomonS. (2004). A function of form: Terror management and structuring the social world. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87(2), 190–210. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.87.2.190
27.
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://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.93.2.234
28.
LernerM. J. (1980). The belief in a just world. In LernerM. J. (Ed.), The belief in a just world (pp. 9–30). Springer.
29.
LevyS. R.ChiuC.HongY. (2006). Lay theories and intergroup relations. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 9(1), 5–24. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430206059855
30.
LinkeL. H. (2012). Social closeness and decision making: Moral, attributive and emotional reactions to third party transgressions. Current Psychology, 31, 291–312. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-012-9146-1
31.
ParkC. L.RileyK. E.GeorgeL. S.GutierrezI. A.HaleA. E.ChoD.BraunT. D. (2016). Assessing disruptions in meaning: Development of the global meaning violation scale. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 40(6), 831–846. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10608-016-9794-9
32.
PiazzaJ.LandyJ. F.GoodwinG. P. (2014). Cruel nature: Harmfulness as an important, overlooked dimension in judgments of moral standing. Cognition, 131(1), 108–124. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2013.12.013
33.
PlaksJ. E.GrantH.DweckC. S. (2005). Violations of implicit theories and the sense of prediction and control: Implications for motivated person perception. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 88(2), 245–262. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.88.2.245
34.
RandlesD.BenjaminR.MartensJ. P.HeineS. J. (2018). Searching for answers in an uncertain world: Meaning threats lead to increased working memory capacity. PLOS ONE, 13(10), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0204640
35.
RandlesD.ProulxT.HeineS. J. (2011). Turn-frogs and careful-sweaters: Non-conscious perception of incongruous word pairings provokes fluid compensation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 47(1), 246–249. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2010.07.020
36.
RoetsA.Van HielA. (2011). Item selection and validation of a brief, 15-item version of the Need for Closure Scale. Personality and Individual Differences, 50(1), 90–94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2010.09.004
37.
RozinP.RoyzmanE. B. (2001). Negativity bias, negativity dominance, and contagion. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 5(4), 296–320. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327957pspr0504_2
38.
SiegelJ. Z.MathysC.RutledgeR. B.CrockettM. J. (2018). Beliefs about bad people are volatile. Nature Human Behaviour, 2(10), 750–756. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-018-0425-1
39.
SkowronskiJ. J.CarlstonD. E.HartnettJ. (2008). Spontaneous impressions derived from observations of behavior: What a long, strange trip it’s been (and it’s not over yet). In AmbadyN.SkowronskiJ. J. (Eds.), First impressions (pp. 313–333). Guilford.
40.
StrohmingerN.KnobeJ.NewmanG. (2017). The true self: A psychological concept distinct from the self. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 12(4), 551–560. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691616689495
TomaselloM. (1999). The human adaptation for culture. Annual Review of Anthropology, 28(1), 509–529.
43.
TullettA. M.TeperR.InzlichtM. (2011). Confronting threats to meaning: A new framework for understanding responses to unsettling events. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 6(5), 447–453. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691611414588
44.
TurpinM. H.WalkerA. C.FugelsangJ. A.SorokowskiP.GrossmannI.BiałekM. (2021). The search for predictable moral partners: Predictability and moral (character) preferences. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 97(July), Article 104196. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2021.104196
45.
WalkerA. C.TurpinM. H.FugelsangJ. A.BiałekM. (2021). Better the two devils you know, than the one you don’t: Predictability influences moral judgments of immoral actors. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 97(December2020), Article 104220. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2021.104220
46.
WaytzA.YoungL. (2018). Morality for us versus them. In GrayK.GrahamJ. (Eds.), Atlas of moral psychology. Guilford Press.
47.
WeidmanA. C.SowdenW. J.BergM. K.KrossE. (2020). 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
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.
