Failing to Express Emotion on 911 Calls Triggers Suspicion through Violating Expectations and Moral Typecasting

Abstract

Coming to suspect someone has engaged in wrongdoing based on their unexpected behavior is a common phenomenon—yet little is known about what triggers initial suspicion. We investigate how violating expectations for high emotionality during a traumatic event can trigger suspicion that one has engaged in immoral—or even criminal—activity through moral typecasting. Five studies demonstrate this theory in a criminal context with dire real-world consequences: 911callers reporting violent crimes generating suspicion due to unexpected behavior, which could trigger confirmation bias in investigations leading to wrongful convictions. Using both real and tightly controlled, simulated 911 calls, we demonstrate that failing to express the expected levelof emotion on a 911 call reporting a violent crime leads laypeople and police to morally typecast the caller as more of a moral agent capable of perpetrating immoral acts and less of a moral patient capable of being the victim of immoral acts—ultimately increasing suspicion they were involved in the crime and support for treating them as a suspect. We advance moral psychologicaltheory by demonstrating that failing to express expected levels of emotion about a moral violation can shape moral inferences about someone’s capacity to commit versus be the victim of moral wrongs, thereby generating suspicion that they might have engaged in wrongdoing. We demonstrate this theory in criminal settings to explain how one tragedy can become two: altruistic witnesses calling 911 to plead for help becoming suspects of the crime they reported because they failed to exhibit expected emotional demeanor.