ArticlePloS one2025
'It's not just immoral!': The role of moral disengagement and incivility in dehumanising the transgressor of immoral behaviour.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Humanizing the Transgressor and Lightening the Immoral Behavior: The Role of Likeability Bias and Moral Rationalization.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
People who engage in immoral behaviour are often dehumanised. However, they also tend to justify their actions to convince themselves or others that their misconduct is morally acceptable. In this paper, we examine whether moral disengagement mechanisms influence the extent to which a transgressor is perceived as fully human. Further, we assess whether this perception varies based on specific characteristics of the immoral behaviour, such as incivility. To answer these research questions, we conducted two studies with online participants from Spain. In Study 1, participants (N = 302) evaluated a set of 63 behaviours. For every behaviour, they assessed the extent to which it violated each moral foundation from moral foundations theory, its level of incivility, and its potential to elicit dehumanisation. A correlation analysis showed that only the care and purity foundations, along with incivility, were associated with dehumanisation. These results allowed us to select behaviours that varied in incivility for Study 2. In Study 2 (N = 402), we tested the effectiveness of moral disengagement mechanisms employed by the transgressor depending on the level of incivility of the immoral behaviour. To this end, we employed a 3 (moral disengagement mechanisms: moral justification vs. displacement of responsibility vs. distortion of consequences) x 2 (incivility: high vs. low) between-subjects experimental design. The variance analyses showed that using moral justification or displacement of responsibility led to the least amount of dehumanisation, while distortion of consequences resulted in the highest level of dehumanisation. Additionally, immoral behaviours that were high in incivility led to greater dehumanisation than those that were low in incivility, regardless of the moral disengagement mechanism. Overall, our research highlights the significance of different moral disengagement mechanisms and civility as key factors that affect how bystanders perceive the humanness of moral transgressors.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.