EXPLORING MODERATORS OF THE ASYMMETRY BETWEEN HONESTY AND DISHONESTY JUDGMENTS

Abstract

The well-documented negativity bias translates to an asymmetry between how people react to morality versus immorality. The present research aims to extend this specifically to honesty versus dishonesty judgments, by looking at the initial judgment of an honest or dishonest act, and a subsequent judgment change following a reversal of that act to a dishonest or honest one, respectively, using a Modified Dictator Game. Concurrently, this asymmetry is predicted to be moderated by two factors – moral licensing and positive affect – which will be explored in two separate studies using priming methods. In Study 1, the negativity bias was replicated such that participants who experienced dishonesty followed by honesty had a smaller change between the initial and final judgments, as compared to participants who experienced honesty followed by dishonesty. However, moral licensing did not inflame judgments as expected. Several explanations were explored, including the prime effectiveness. In Pilot Study 2, the data revealed an interesting trend contrary to the expectation that positive affect would mitigate the honesty-dishonesty judgments asymmetry.