Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37255506›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychology2023

Does believing something to be fiction allow a form of moral licencing or a 'fictive pass' in understanding others' actions?

Jacqueline Thompson, Ben Teasdale, Evert van Emde Boas, Felix Budelmann, Sophie Duncan, Laurie Maguire, Robin Dunbar

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Jacqueline ThompsonCalleva Research Centre, Magdalen College, Oxford, United Kingdom.
Ben TeasdaleCalleva Research Centre, Magdalen College, Oxford, United Kingdom.
Evert van Emde BoasCalleva Research Centre, Magdalen College, Oxford, United Kingdom.
Felix BudelmannCalleva Research Centre, Magdalen College, Oxford, United Kingdom.
Sophie DuncanCalleva Research Centre, Magdalen College, Oxford, United Kingdom.
Laurie MaguireCalleva Research Centre, Magdalen College, Oxford, United Kingdom.
Robin DunbarCalleva Research Centre, Magdalen College, Oxford, United Kingdom.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: The human capacity to engage with fictional worlds raises important psychological questions about the mechanisms that make this possible. Of particular interest is whether people respond differently to fictional stories compared to factual ones in terms of how immersed they become and how they view the characters involved and their actions. It has been suggested that fiction provides us with a 'fictive pass' that allows us to evaluate in a more balanced, detached way the morality of a character's behaviour. Methods: We use a randomised controlled experimental design to test this. Results and discussion: We show that, although knowing whether a substantial film clip is fact or fiction does not affect how engaged with ('transported' by) a troubling story an observer becomes, it does grant them a 'fictive pass' to empathise with a moral transgressor. However, a fictive pass does not override the capacity to judge the causes of a character's moral transgression (at least as indexed by a causal attribution task).

Indexed as

causal attributionempathyfictional transportationfictive passidentification

Identifiers

PMID37255506
PMCPMC10225679

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.