Do People Always Prefer Revealers over Hiders? Role of Perceived Immorality

Abstract

Do observers assume the worst when people hide potentially unfavorable information? Some research has found that revealing unfavorable information is advantageous, whereas other research has found that hiding unfavorable information is better. We identified a boundary condition to bring together these contradictory findings: When people can readily infer the target’s immorality from the missing information, they assume the worst about the missing information, and hence prefer targets who reveal. Specifically, across three experiments, we found that it is better to reveal information when targets failed to engage in good behaviors, engaged in bad behaviors unintentionally, or engaged in other behaviors that can serve as diagnostic cues to fill in the missing information. Whereas, it is better to hide information when targets engaged in morally bad behaviors, engaged in bad behaviors intentionally, and when no other diagnostic information is available.