University Presentation Showcase: Undergraduate Division
Framing the Conflict: Ingroup Bias and the Good Guy/Bad Guy Fallacy in Moral Judgment
Presenter Hometown
Fremont, CA
Major
Psychology
Department
Psychology
Degree
Undergraduate
Mentor
Jonathan Gore
Mentor Department
Psychology
Recommended Citation
Arce, Aliyah, "Framing the Conflict: Ingroup Bias and the Good Guy/Bad Guy Fallacy in Moral Judgment" (2026). University Presentation Showcase Event. 5.
https://encompass.eku.edu/swps/2026/undergraduate/5
Abstract
The purpose of this experiment was to examine the prevalence of the Good Guy/Bad Guy (GG/BG) Fallacy thinking in a school setting. The GG/BG Fallacy refers to when there is conflict between two sides, and additional negative or positive information is given about one of the disputing sides, an observer will assume the opposing side is more positive. Three hypotheses were tested: 1. The Good Guy/Bad Guy Fallacy is more likely to occur when the known information is negative than when it is positive. 2. The Good Guy/Bad Guy Fallacy is more likely to occur towards an outgroup member than for an ingroup member. 3. Good Guy/Bad Guy Fallacy is strongest for an outgroup member when revealed information about them is negative. A total of 120 college students were randomly assigned to one of four conditions, in which either a student or professor involved in a conflict was framed either positively or negatively. Participants then rated both individuals on a series of moral character traits. Results supported all three hypotheses: the strongest GG/BG effects occurred when the professor (outgroup) was framed negatively, leading to more favorable ratings of the student (ingroup). Positive framing did not produce the same contrast. These findings suggest that the GG/BG Fallacy is more likely to occur in response to negatively framed outgroup members in conflict scenarios.
Presentation format
Poster
Framing the Conflict: Ingroup Bias and the Good Guy/Bad Guy Fallacy in Moral Judgment
The purpose of this experiment was to examine the prevalence of the Good Guy/Bad Guy (GG/BG) Fallacy thinking in a school setting. The GG/BG Fallacy refers to when there is conflict between two sides, and additional negative or positive information is given about one of the disputing sides, an observer will assume the opposing side is more positive. Three hypotheses were tested: 1. The Good Guy/Bad Guy Fallacy is more likely to occur when the known information is negative than when it is positive. 2. The Good Guy/Bad Guy Fallacy is more likely to occur towards an outgroup member than for an ingroup member. 3. Good Guy/Bad Guy Fallacy is strongest for an outgroup member when revealed information about them is negative. A total of 120 college students were randomly assigned to one of four conditions, in which either a student or professor involved in a conflict was framed either positively or negatively. Participants then rated both individuals on a series of moral character traits. Results supported all three hypotheses: the strongest GG/BG effects occurred when the professor (outgroup) was framed negatively, leading to more favorable ratings of the student (ingroup). Positive framing did not produce the same contrast. These findings suggest that the GG/BG Fallacy is more likely to occur in response to negatively framed outgroup members in conflict scenarios.
