scholarly journals Ambiguity under scrutiny: Moral judgment of microaggressions

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joanna Korman ◽  
Boyoung Kim

Microaggressions are subtle, offensive comments directed at minority group members that are characteristically ambiguous in meaning. In two studies, we explored how observers interpret such ambiguous statements by comparing microaggressions to faux pas, offenses caused by the speaker having an incidental false belief. In Study 1, we compared third-party observers’ blame and intentionality judgments of microaggressions with those for social faux pas. Despite judging both offenses not to be caused intentionally, participants judged microaggressions as more blameworthy. In Study 2 microaggressions without explicit mental state information exhibited a similar profile of judgments as those accompanied by explicit prejudiced or ignorant beliefs. Although they are, like faux pas, judged not to cause harm intentionally, microaggressive comments appear to be judged as more blameworthy on account of enduring prejudice thought to be lurking behind a speaker’s false or incorrect beliefs. Our studies demonstrate a distinctive profile of moral judgment for microaggressions.

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maria Luz Gonzalez-Gadea ◽  
Antonella Dominguez ◽  
Agustin Petroni

Children tend to punish norm transgressions, even when they are mere external observers—a phenomenon known as third-party punishment. This behavior is influenced by group biases, as children unevenly punish in-group and out-group members.Two opposing hypotheses have been proposed to explain group biases during third-party punishment: the Norms-Focused Hypothesis predicts that individuals punish more harshly selfishness by in-group than by out-group members; contrarily, the Mere Preferences Hypothesis predicts that people are more lenient to selfishness by in-group than by out-group members. Here, we tested these hypotheses in children between six and 11 years of age (N=124) and explored the mechanisms underlying group biases during the development of third-party punishment. Our results supported the Norms-Focused Hypothesis: children preferentially punished unfair sharing from in-group members evidencing in-group policing bias, and they were also more willing to punish selfishness directed at in-group members than out-group members, showing in-group favoritism bias. We observed different developmental trajectories and mechanisms associated with these biases: while in-group policing remained stable over childhood as automatic as well as more effortful and controlled processes, in-group favoritism increases with age and was manifested only in the context of more controlled processes. These results shed light on the mechanisms underlying the development of third-party decisions and could be used to plan strategies and interventions to manipulate group biases in children.


2015 ◽  
Vol 33 (3) ◽  
pp. 241-254 ◽  
Author(s):  
Evelyn R. Carter ◽  
Destiny Peery ◽  
Jennifer A. Richeson ◽  
Mary C. Murphy

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document