Anton, Delia Andreea (2023) Being Seen in a Good Light? Doing the Same, Yet Being Judged Differently. Bachelor thesis, Psychology.
![[img]](https://gmwpublic.studenttheses.ub.rug.nl/style/images/fileicons/text.png) |
Text
Being Seen in a Good Light? Doing the Same, Yet Being Judged Differently.pdf Restricted to Repository staff only Download (712kB) |
Abstract
The present research paper examines how heuristics, specifically representativeness and availability, affect subjective ratings of negative evaluations (i.e., severity and moral outrage) in response to an ambiguous allegation of sexism. The sample consisted of 196 participants who read and assessed two vignettes involving a female and a male target who made an ambiguous allegation of sexism. The results suggest a significant difference in target perceived typicality of harm allegations, with the perpetrator in the female target condition being judged more severely and their treatment instigating more moral outrage. The female target perceived availability of harm allegations was more cognitively available than the male target perceived availability of harm allegations. Furthermore, the female target perceived availability of harm allegations had a more significant correlation with moral outrage than severity. The pattern points out that when it comes to the target perceived availability of harm allegations, people use the availability heuristic in judging how unfairly the victim was treated in their environment, not how severe the act of the perpetrator was, even though there was a significant correlation found between female target perceived availability of harm allegations and severity.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Bachelor) |
|---|---|
| Supervisor name: | Graso, M. |
| Degree programme: | Psychology |
| Differentiation route: | None [Bachelor Psychology] |
| Date Deposited: | 24 Jul 2023 10:13 |
| Last Modified: | 24 Jul 2023 10:15 |
| URI: | http://gmwpublic.studenttheses.ub.rug.nl/id/eprint/2563 |
Actions (login required)
 |
View Item |