Abstract
Two experiments investigated whether outcomes that violate people's moral standards increase their deviant behavior (the moral spillover effect). In Study 1, participants with and without a moral mandate (i.e., a strong attitude rooted in moral conviction) read about a legal trial in which the outcome supported, opposed or was unrelated to their moral mandate. Relative to when outcomes supported moral mandates, when outcomes opposed moral mandates people judged the outcome to be less fair, were more angry, were less willing to accept the outcome, and were more likely to take a borrowed pen. In Study 2, participants who recalled another person's moral violation were more likely to cheat on an experimental task relative to angry or neutral condition participants. Taken together, results provide evidence for moral spillover: outcomes that violate moral standards increase deviant behavior.
| Original language | English (US) |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 1239-1245 |
| Number of pages | 7 |
| Journal | Journal of Experimental Social Psychology |
| Volume | 44 |
| Issue number | 5 |
| DOIs | |
| State | Published - Sep 2008 |
Funding
This research was supported by the Dispute Resolution Research Center at Northwestern University, the American Bar Foundation, and was facilitated by National Science Foundation Grant SES-0530380. We thank Gillian Fensterman and Jennifer Rosner for their help with data collection and John Patrick Johnson for his help with the logit analyses in Study 1.
Keywords
- Decision acceptance
- Deviant behavior
- Fairness
- Justice
- Moral mandate
- Moral violation
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Social Psychology
- Sociology and Political Science