Beyond Moral Outrage: The Role of the Ingroup in Online Condemnations

ABSTRACT Although expressions of condemnation are pervasive on social media and often shape the narratives of traditional news outlets, brands continue to struggle with predicting and managing these responses effectively. To address this challenge, it is crucial to first understand the underlying reasons for such behavior. While existing research argues that moral outrage alone is sufficient to drive online condemnations, we present a more nuanced approach as to when and why this behavior occurs. Across six studies (including Supplementary Appendix A; N = 1285) we argue and find that the perception that there is a like‐minded ingroup to whom one can signal is critical for promulgating online condemnations. Notably, this audience must be perceived to feel similarly outraged as the condemner (studies 1a‐c), and the condemner must be able to signal to this audience through a public post (vs. merely expressing their condemnation privately with no audience; study 2). Engaging in such condemnations predicts subsequent actual consumption choices (study 3), with substantive implications for marketers.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Psychology and Marketing
Published
2025-09-16
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.70040
Primary Topic
Misinformation and Its Impacts
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Beyond Moral Outrage: The Role of the Ingroup in Online Condemnations

Jeff Rotman, Andrew W. Perkins, Americus Reed, Virginia Weber
Psychology and Marketing
Misinformation and Its Impacts
article

Beyond Moral Outrage: The Role of the Ingroup in Online Condemnations

Jeff Rotman, Andrew W. Perkins, Americus Reed, Virginia Weber
article en

Abstract

ABSTRACT Although expressions of condemnation are pervasive on social media and often shape the narratives of traditional news outlets, brands continue to struggle with predicting and managing these responses effectively. To address this challenge, it is crucial to first understand the underlying reasons for such behavior. While existing research argues that moral outrage alone is sufficient to drive online condemnations, we present a more nuanced approach as to when and why this behavior occurs. Across six studies (including Supplementary Appendix A; N = 1285) we argue and find that the perception that there is a like‐minded ingroup to whom one can signal is critical for promulgating online condemnations. Notably, this audience must be perceived to feel similarly outraged as the condemner (studies 1a‐c), and the condemner must be able to signal to this audience through a public post (vs. merely expressing their condemnation privately with no audience; study 2). Engaging in such condemnations predicts subsequent actual consumption choices (study 3), with substantive implications for marketers.

Psychology and MarketingVol. 43(1)
Deakin University (AU), Washington State University Spokane (US), Carson Newman University (US), University of the Arts (US), William P. Wharton Trust (US), University of Pennsylvania (US), Mount Royal University (CA)
Openalex Percentile: Top 67%
Misinformation and Its Impacts
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.