The Overdetermined Outcome Defense: Using and Seeking Happenstance Events To Justify Bad Intentions

Authors:

Abstract: We identify and document an “overdetermined outcome defense” which occurs when, after violating one’s self-standards, one learns that circumstances besides one’s own actions were sufficient to produce the same negative effect (e.g., deciding not to volunteer at the homeless shelter but later discovering that the shelter had been closed anyway). We present eight preregistered studies (total N=4006) examining the effect of overdetermined outcomes on self-judgment. Generally, people felt less guilty when they discovered that their negative outcomes were overdetermined than if no such information was available across a variety of contexts. Studies showed that this defense has both cognitive and motivated components, and people use it despite acknowledging its illegitimacy. Furthermore, results indicated that guilt motivated people to seek information that would support the claim that a self-standard-violating outcome would have occurred irrespective of their self-standards-violating action. Our findings contribute to the literatures on outcome bias, justification, and irrational acquiescence.

Track: DEC

Keywords: want/should conflict, morality, prosocial behavior, self-control