Damned if They Do, Damned if They Don't: Lay Assumptions About “Evil” Individuals' Everyday Behaviours

Reminiscent of person perception research involving central traits or the "horns"/negative halo effect, we tested the "evil through-and-through" (ETT) hypothesis-that is, that cues alluding to someone's "evil" thoughts lead to the presumed predominance of antisocial behaviours and to disallowance or adverse construal of ostensibly prosocial or mundane behaviours. Canadian undergraduates (N = 189) rated how likely one of six targets (three "evil" and three "not evil") had recently engaged in mildly antisocial, prosocial and morally neutral behaviours. Relative to "not evil" targets, participants assumed that "evil" targets engaged in more antisocial and mobility-related behaviours and fewer prosocial and self-care behaviours. Moreover, participants were more likely to attribute evil targets' action or inaction across all these domains to "bad" reasons (e.g., character flaws, preoccupation, pretence). In short, the "evil" are othered, and there appears to be little they can do (or not do) to shift this perception.