Good intentions aren't good enough: Moral courage in opposing sexual harassment

Goodwin, Rachael; Graham, Jesse; Diekmann, Kristina A.

doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2019.103894

Cited by 27 publications

(24 citation statements)

References 81 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…We acknowledge that this reasoning is based on rather preliminary data and needs to be corroborated in future research, that ideally considers further potential antecedents of people’s disapproval and rejection of supporters of COVID-19-related conspiracy theories. As people who actively reject supporters (e.g., by disapproving responses to supporters on social media) might be more likely to encounter negative interactions with supporters than those who disbelieve in a rather passive way (e.g., by staying silent), variables that have been found to predict intervening behavior implicating confrontation and negative social consequences for the self (e.g., moral courage) might be promising candidates here (e.g., individuals’ trait moral courage or their agreeableness; Goodwin et al, 2020; Halmburger et al, 2017).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The role of self-evaluation in predicting attitudes toward supporters of COVID-19-related conspiracy theories: A direct and a conceptual replication of Cichocka et al. (2016)

Siem

Kretzmeyer

Stürmer

2021

Journal of Pacific Rim Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We examined the role of people’s self-evaluation in predicting their attitudes toward supporters of COVID-19-related conspiracy theories by replicating and extending the findings of a study by Cichocka et al. (2016, Study 3) in two preregistered studies (total N = 1179). Study 1, a direct replication, confirmed that narcissism and self-esteem—two different sources of people’s self-evaluation—differentially predicted their beliefs in a series of well-known conspiracy theories (not related to COVID-19), and served as mutual suppressor variables. Specifically, narcissism was positively related and self-esteem was negatively related to conspiracy beliefs, especially when the respective other predictor was controlled for. Study 2 extended Cichocka’s and our Study 1’s findings by testing the differential role of self-esteem and narcissism in predicting a COVID-19-specific criterion. Specifically, we focused on people’s rejection of supporters of COVID-19 conspiracy theories, a criterion we deem particularly important in curtailing the spread of these theories. Results were generally in line with previous findings, but effects were substantially weaker. As suggested by exploratory analyses, this might be due to the fact that the overall rejection of supporters measure comprises not only items capturing rejection of supporters but also items capturing low beliefs in conspiracy theories. These two distinct components differentially related to self-esteem and narcissism: the differential role of self-esteem and narcissism could only be replicated for the “low belief” subcomponent (thus replicating findings from the original study and from Study 1) but not for the “rejection of supporters” subcomponent. The present work thus contributes to recent research suggesting that low belief in conspiracy theories and the rejection of their supporters might be qualitatively different responses with unique antecedents.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The role of self-evaluation in predicting attitudes toward supporters of COVID-19-related conspiracy theories: A direct and a conceptual replication of Cichocka et al. (2016)

Siem

Kretzmeyer

Stürmer

2021

Journal of Pacific Rim Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Furthermore, less willingness to help COVID-19 victims may be illustrative of a general tendency for people higher in binding values, regardless of politics, to judge victims with less sensitivity. Prior research shows that people higher in binding values are more likely to stigmatize victims as tainted and contaminated, judge victims as more responsible and blameworthy for their own victimization, and are less likely to defend victims of sexual harassment by confronting and reporting harassment (Niemi and Young, 2016;Goodwin et al, 2020;Niemi et al, 2020). By contrast, people higher in individualizing values, which are associated with increased sensitivity to suffering and do not emphasize contamination risks, have been found to be more prosocial (e.g., Graham et al, 2011;Iyer et al, 2012;Young, 2013, 2016;Noser et al, 2015;Niemi et al, 2020) and may be more willing to help those affected by the coronavirus.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

It's Not the Flu: Popular Perceptions of the Impact of COVID-19 in the U.S.

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Messaging from U.S. authorities about COVID-19 has been widely divergent. This research aims to clarify popular perceptions of the COVID-19 threat and its effects on victims. In four studies with over 4,100 U.S. participants, we consistently found that people perceive the threat of COVID-19 to be substantially greater than that of several other causes of death to which it has recently been compared, including the seasonal flu and automobile accidents. Participants were less willing to help COVID-19 victims, who they considered riskier to help, more contaminated, and more responsible for their condition. Additionally, politics and demographic factors predicted attitudes about victims of COVID-19 above and beyond moral values; whereas attitudes about the other kinds of victims were primarily predicted by moral values. The results indicate that people perceive COVID-19 as an exceptionally severe disease threat, and despite prosocial inclinations, do not feel safe offering assistance to COVID-19 sufferers. This research has urgent applied significance: the findings are relevant to public health efforts and related marketing campaigns working to address extended damage to society and the economy from the pandemic. In particular, efforts to educate the public about the health impacts of COVID-19, encourage compliance with testing protocols and contact tracing, and support safe, prosocial decision-making and risk assessment, will all benefit from awareness of these findings. The results also suggest approaches, such as engaging people's stable values rather than their politicized perspectives on COVID-19, that may reduce stigma and promote cooperation in response to pandemic threats.

show abstract

“…Furthermore, less willingness to help COVID-19 victims may be illustrative of a general tendency for people higher in binding values, regardless of politics, to judge victims with less sensitivity. Prior research shows that people higher in binding values are more likely to stigmatize victims as tainted and contaminated, judge victims as more responsible and blameworthy for their own victimization, and are less likely to defend victims of sexual harassment by confronting and reporting harassment (Goodwin, Graham & Diekmann, 2020;Niemi & Young, 2016;Niemi, Hartshorne, Gerstenberg, Stanley & Young, 2020). By contrast, people higher in individualizing values, which are associated with increased sensitivity to suffering and do not emphasize contamination risks, may be more willing to help those affected by the coronavirus.…”

Section: Hypothesis Developmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

It’s Not the Flu: Popular perceptions of the impact of COVID-19

Niemi¹,

Kniffin²,

Doris³

2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Messaging from authorities about COVID-19 has been widely divergent. This research aims to clarify popular perceptions of the threat of COVID-19 and its effects on victims. In four studies with over 4,100 U.S. participants, we consistently found that people perceive the threat of COVID-19 to be substantially greater than that of several other causes of death to which it has recently been compared, including the seasonal flu and automobile accidents. Participants were less willing to help COVID-19 victims, who they considered riskier to help, more contaminated, and more responsible for their condition. Additionally, politics and demographic factors predicted attitudes about victims of COVID-19 above and beyond moral values; whereas attitudes about the other kinds of victims were primarily predicted by moral values. The results indicate that people perceive COVID-19 as an exceptionally severe disease threat, and despite prosocial inclinations, do not feel safe offering assistance to COVID-19 sufferers.

show abstract

Good intentions aren't good enough: Moral courage in opposing sexual harassment

Cited by 27 publications

References 81 publications

The role of self-evaluation in predicting attitudes toward supporters of COVID-19-related conspiracy theories: A direct and a conceptual replication of Cichocka et al. (2016)

The role of self-evaluation in predicting attitudes toward supporters of COVID-19-related conspiracy theories: A direct and a conceptual replication of Cichocka et al. (2016)

It's Not the Flu: Popular Perceptions of the Impact of COVID-19 in the U.S.

It’s Not the Flu: Popular perceptions of the impact of COVID-19

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About