Moral Encroachment: Believing / Acting

Do our results in Moral Encroachment I, our opening study, reflect moral encroachment—namely, that, according to folks, a person requires more epistemic evidence to be epistemically justified in believing that p when believing that p involves the moral risk of holding a false stereotypical belief, other things being equal? Or do they instead reflect the view that, according to folks, more epistemic evidence is required for epistemic justification when believing that p involves the moral risk of acting on a false stereotypical belief than when it involves no such risk, other things being equal, given that respondents may have assumed that John would have acted on the belief in order to address a waiter?