Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39989407›Full record

ArticlePersonality & social psychology bulletin2026

Dignity Is Distinct From Respect: How Treating Others With Dignity Entails Accounting for Their Self-Conscious Emotions.

Milan Andrejević, Jakob Hohwy, Linda Barclay

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Personality & social psychology bulletin, 2026. 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

3 authors.

Milan AndrejevićMonash University, Clayton, Victoria, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-7112-9384
Jakob HohwyMonash University, Clayton, Victoria, Australia.
Linda BarclayMonash University, Clayton, Victoria, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Dignity is prominently endorsed in health care, organizations, and law. However, humanities research casts doubt over the utility of this concept, disputing that "dignity" captures any unique ethical value distinguishable from "respect". Here, we test a recent proposal that dignity entails special regard for humiliation. We created a set of vignettes describing a "perpetrator" making offensive remarks or gestures to a "victim", and asked lay participants to rate how well each offense corresponds to a dignity violation as opposed to a respect violation. We manipulated the victims' resulting emotions within-subject, across "humiliation", "anger", and "baseline" conditions, while controlling for other factors (e.g., victim's gender, vulnerability). We found substantial evidence (BF = 4.11) for our preregistered hypothesis that humiliation increased dignity-relatedness ratings as compared with the baseline condition, and very strong evidence when compared with the anger condition (BF = 84.75). These findings provide empirical backing to dignitarian ethics with applications in health care, organizations, and law.

Indexed as

EmotionsPersonhoodRespectAdultFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedYoung Adultbullyingdignityhumiliationmoral vignettesrespect

Identifiers

PMID39989407
PMCPMC13096622

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.