Fight, Flight, or Forgive? Observers’ Judgments of an Ingroup Member’s Response to Harm

Student: Zachary Blaustone

Faculty Mentor: Heather Smith

Psychology

College of Humanities, Social Sciences, and the Arts

Building on prior research in moral judgment, group loyalty, and social categorization, this study investigates whether targets of interpersonal aggression are socially penalized based on their response to the aggression—and how these evaluations are influenced by political group identity and the perpetrator’s public apology. Participants will view a video reenactment of an altercation in which a student from either a Democrat or Republican college club—determined by the participant's own political identification—physically pushes a student from the opposing party. The target will then either forgive, retaliate, or walk away, followed by the aggressor issuing a public apology or a defensive “doubling down” post on social media. We will measure participants’ support for the target, recommended punishment for the aggressor, perceived damage to the in-group’s reputation, and perceived violations of shared moral values. Initial data collection has begun. We hypothesize that forgiveness will be perceived as most damaging when directed toward an unapologetic outgroup aggressor and that strong in-group political identification will amplify this effect. These findings have important implications for political psychology, restorative justice, and broader perceptions of victimhood in polarized contexts.