The Moral Dilution Effect
Irrelevant Information Influences Judgments of Moral Character
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 12166705 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Cillian Mchugh (0000-0002-9701-3232, University of Limerick Limerick Ireland, corresponding author), Eric R Igou (0000-0001-7744-9648, University of Limerick Limerick Ireland) |
| Year | 2025 |
| Volume | 38 |
| Issue | 4 |
| Publication date | 2025-08-03 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Journal of Behavioral Decision Making (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0894-3257 • E-ISSN: 1099-0771 |
| Publisher | Wiley (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1002/bdm.70034 |
| OpenAlex | W4412947049 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 1 |
| References cited | 41 |
It is reasonable to expect that when making a judgment, we only consider the relevant (or diagnostic) information and that nonrelevant (nondiagnostic) information should not, and thus does not, influence our judgments. Previous research has shown that this is not always the case and that the inclusion of nondiagnostic information can reduce the impact of diagnostic information in judgments. This phenomenon is known as the dilution effect, and it has been observed for a range of judgments, including product evaluations, probability judgments, and predictions relating to people's behavior. The dilution effect has been explained as a consequence of the representativeness heuristic, such that the inclusion of nondiagnostic information reduces the match between the target and a typical member of the category. Consistent with this notion and recent approaches to moral decision making, we predict that the dilution effect should be observed for judgments about morality. Across four studies (total N = 2535), we tested for the dilution effect on judgments of morally bad actors and morally good actors. Overall, our results showed a dilution effect for judgments of both good and bad actors. People's moral evaluations of both good and bad actors were less extreme when the descriptions included nondiagnostic information. We showed that this effect is not the result of humanization, and we found that the robustness of the effect appears to be moderated by valence, with a more robust effect for bad actors. Our results highlight avenues for future research
Character (mathematics · Cognitive psychology · Epistemology · Moral character · Moral reasoning · Ethics in Business and Education · Mathematics · Philosophy · Psychology · Psychology of Moral and Emotional Judgment · Social and Intergroup Psychology · Social Psychology
Advances In Experimental Social Psychology
The Theory of Dyadic Morality
Subjective probability
Logic and Conversation
Moral Judgment as Categorization (MJAC)
The Moral Psychology of Raceless, Genderless Strangers
The Importance of Context in Moral Judgments
Principles of moral accounting
Impure or Just Weird? Scenario Sampling Bias Raises Questions About the Foundation of Morality
Situated simulation in the human conceptual system
The dilution effect
Separating the wheat from the chaff
Sexual Assault Law, Credibility, and “Ideal Victims”
What does it mean to be (seen as) human? The importance of gender in humanization
Better the two devils you know, than the one you don't
The dilution effect
What is the psychological appeal of the serial rapist model? Worldviews predicting endorsement
The Good Politician and Political Trust
Accountability
Liberals and conservatives rely on different sets of moral foundations
Bad is Stronger than Good
The Moral Dyad
Pluralistic Collapse
Additional Thoughts on Conversational and Motivational Sources of the Dilution Effect
The Conversational Basis for the Dilution Effect
Consumers' Beliefs about Product Benefits
| Unique citing works | 1 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 1 |
| Citation span | 2026 - 2026 (1) |
| Citation velocity | current |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 1 |