Suchergebnisse

Despite their popularity, online video games possess pervasive toxicity. However, players do not categorically judge toxic behaviors as wrong. Attribution theories are well suited to disambiguate such judgment variance, but debate exists on the usefulness of motivated versus socially regulated blame perspectives. By exploring a new, potentially toxic behavior called "smurfing," we innovate on methodological barriers that make experimentally disentangling socially regulated and motivated attribution perspectives difficult. In Study 1, we empirically present, describe, and explore smurfing and its perceived effects as a novel cheating behavior in online gaming. In Study 2, we extracted player-generated reasons for smurfing and manipulated the stakes of games to manipulate transgression salience (a key factor of blame attribution) across a moral continuum. By having participants use a mock crowd-sourced judgment platform, we observed the (in)stability of stakes across a continuum of reasons. We subsequently replicated our findings with a novel sample in Study 3.

Affective disposition theory (ADT) explains that the moral judgments of character behavior inform dispositions toward characters. These dispositions bias moral judgments of characters' subsequent behaviors and establish behavioral expectations. We used expectancy violations theory to help specify people's dispositions toward characters. In study 1, we modified the footbridge dilemma to develop experimental stimuli and predictions. Studies 2 and 3 observed the disposition formation process longitudinally and validated our stimulus: a custom-built visual novel. Study 4 tested our predictions. Studies 2 through 4 used pre-registered hypotheses, sampling, and data analyses. Results demonstrated that the current disposition (positive vs. negative) changes how a novel (im)moral behavior affects that disposition. Schema-violating behaviors provoked larger mean differences in participants' dispositions toward protagonists compared to antagonists. Specifically, people were hyper-scrutinous of moral paragons and entrenched despised characters in moral skepticism. Additionally, we observed differences in dispositions toward characters who did not act when they could (inaction).

Integrating the predictions of disposition theory and expectancy violations theory, a longitudinal survey assessed adults' parasocial relationships with characters in a popular movie franchise before and after the release of the latest film installment of that franchise. Consistent with disposition theory, characters' immoral behavior in the film weakened participants' parasocial relationships with those characters. However, analyses conducted using a novel statistical technique (i.e., response surface analysis) revealed that further shifts in the strength of these relationships occurred when characters subverted participants' expectations regarding their typical moral behavior. Specifically, participants' relationship with the film's primary villain strengthened when he was perceived as behaving more morally than expected, whereas their relationship with the film's primary hero weakened when he was perceived as behaving either more or less morally than expected. These findings highlight the need for more nuanced examinations of disposition formation processes.