Home > Research > Publications & Outputs > Perceiving the agency of harmful agents

Associated organisational unit

Electronic data

  • SSRN-id2658908

    Rights statement: This is the author’s version of a work that was accepted for publication in Cognition. Changes resulting from the publishing process, such as peer review, editing, corrections, structural formatting, and other quality control mechanisms may not be reflected in this document. Changes may have been made to this work since it was submitted for publication. A definitive version was subsequently published in Cognition, 146, 2016 DOI: 10.1016/j.cognition.2015.09.009

    Accepted author manuscript, 555 KB, PDF document

    Available under license: CC BY-NC-ND: Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License

Links

Text available via DOI:

View graph of relations

Perceiving the agency of harmful agents: a test of dehumanization versus moral typecasting accounts

Research output: Contribution to Journal/MagazineJournal articlepeer-review

Published

Standard

Perceiving the agency of harmful agents: a test of dehumanization versus moral typecasting accounts. / Khamitov, Mansur; Rotman, Jeff; Piazza, Jared.
In: Cognition, Vol. 146, 01.2016, p. 33-47.

Research output: Contribution to Journal/MagazineJournal articlepeer-review

Harvard

APA

Vancouver

Khamitov M, Rotman J, Piazza J. Perceiving the agency of harmful agents: a test of dehumanization versus moral typecasting accounts. Cognition. 2016 Jan;146:33-47. Epub 2015 Sept 20. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2015.09.009

Author

Khamitov, Mansur ; Rotman, Jeff ; Piazza, Jared. / Perceiving the agency of harmful agents : a test of dehumanization versus moral typecasting accounts. In: Cognition. 2016 ; Vol. 146. pp. 33-47.

Bibtex

@article{47e5c124a3c14dfa98d68be9a7adb044,
title = "Perceiving the agency of harmful agents: a test of dehumanization versus moral typecasting accounts",
abstract = "It is clear that harmful agents are targets of severe condemnation, but it is much less clear how perceivers conceptualize the agency of harmful agents. The current studies tested two competing predictions made by moral typecasting theory and the dehumanization literature. Across six studies, harmful agents were perceived to possess less agency than neutral (non-offending) and benevolent agents, consistent with a dehumanization perspective but inconsistent with the assumptions of moral typecasting theory. This was observed for human targets (Studies 1-2b, and 4-5) and corporations (Study 3), and across various gradations of harmfulness (Studies 3-4). Importantly, denial of agency to harmful agents occurred even when controlling for perceptions of the agent{\textquoteright}s likeability (Studies 2a and 2b) and while using two different operationalizations of agency (Study 2a). Study 5 showed that harmful agents are denied agency primarily through an inferential process, and less through motivations to see the agent punished. Across all six studies, harmful agents were deemed less worthy of moral standing as a consequence of their harmful conduct and this reduction in moral standing was mediated through reductions in agency. Our findings clarify a current tension in the moral cognition literature, which have direct implications for the moral typecasting framework.",
keywords = "Harmfulness, Agency, Moral standing, Dehumanization, Moral typecasting, Moral cognition",
author = "Mansur Khamitov and Jeff Rotman and Jared Piazza",
note = "Evidence of acceptance on Publisher pdf 12 month embargo This is the author{\textquoteright}s version of a work that was accepted for publication in Cognition. Changes resulting from the publishing process, such as peer review, editing, corrections, structural formatting, and other quality control mechanisms may not be reflected in this document. Changes may have been made to this work since it was submitted for publication. A definitive version was subsequently published in Cognition, 146, 2016 DOI: 10.1016/j.cognition.2015.09.009",
year = "2016",
month = jan,
doi = "10.1016/j.cognition.2015.09.009",
language = "English",
volume = "146",
pages = "33--47",
journal = "Cognition",
issn = "0010-0277",
publisher = "Elsevier",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Perceiving the agency of harmful agents

T2 - a test of dehumanization versus moral typecasting accounts

AU - Khamitov, Mansur

AU - Rotman, Jeff

AU - Piazza, Jared

N1 - Evidence of acceptance on Publisher pdf 12 month embargo This is the author’s version of a work that was accepted for publication in Cognition. Changes resulting from the publishing process, such as peer review, editing, corrections, structural formatting, and other quality control mechanisms may not be reflected in this document. Changes may have been made to this work since it was submitted for publication. A definitive version was subsequently published in Cognition, 146, 2016 DOI: 10.1016/j.cognition.2015.09.009

PY - 2016/1

Y1 - 2016/1

N2 - It is clear that harmful agents are targets of severe condemnation, but it is much less clear how perceivers conceptualize the agency of harmful agents. The current studies tested two competing predictions made by moral typecasting theory and the dehumanization literature. Across six studies, harmful agents were perceived to possess less agency than neutral (non-offending) and benevolent agents, consistent with a dehumanization perspective but inconsistent with the assumptions of moral typecasting theory. This was observed for human targets (Studies 1-2b, and 4-5) and corporations (Study 3), and across various gradations of harmfulness (Studies 3-4). Importantly, denial of agency to harmful agents occurred even when controlling for perceptions of the agent’s likeability (Studies 2a and 2b) and while using two different operationalizations of agency (Study 2a). Study 5 showed that harmful agents are denied agency primarily through an inferential process, and less through motivations to see the agent punished. Across all six studies, harmful agents were deemed less worthy of moral standing as a consequence of their harmful conduct and this reduction in moral standing was mediated through reductions in agency. Our findings clarify a current tension in the moral cognition literature, which have direct implications for the moral typecasting framework.

AB - It is clear that harmful agents are targets of severe condemnation, but it is much less clear how perceivers conceptualize the agency of harmful agents. The current studies tested two competing predictions made by moral typecasting theory and the dehumanization literature. Across six studies, harmful agents were perceived to possess less agency than neutral (non-offending) and benevolent agents, consistent with a dehumanization perspective but inconsistent with the assumptions of moral typecasting theory. This was observed for human targets (Studies 1-2b, and 4-5) and corporations (Study 3), and across various gradations of harmfulness (Studies 3-4). Importantly, denial of agency to harmful agents occurred even when controlling for perceptions of the agent’s likeability (Studies 2a and 2b) and while using two different operationalizations of agency (Study 2a). Study 5 showed that harmful agents are denied agency primarily through an inferential process, and less through motivations to see the agent punished. Across all six studies, harmful agents were deemed less worthy of moral standing as a consequence of their harmful conduct and this reduction in moral standing was mediated through reductions in agency. Our findings clarify a current tension in the moral cognition literature, which have direct implications for the moral typecasting framework.

KW - Harmfulness

KW - Agency

KW - Moral standing

KW - Dehumanization

KW - Moral typecasting

KW - Moral cognition

U2 - 10.1016/j.cognition.2015.09.009

DO - 10.1016/j.cognition.2015.09.009

M3 - Journal article

VL - 146

SP - 33

EP - 47

JO - Cognition

JF - Cognition

SN - 0010-0277

ER -