Reputation and Reactions to the Successful Plagiarising Professor

Abstract

Social media now allow the evaluation and documentation of people's reputations online (e.g. upvotes and downvotes). The psychological mechanisms (Deservingness, Rivalry) associated with such evaluation were probed by considering reactions to vignettes outlining the success or failure of an honest or plagiarising professor. 109 participants completed the Tall Poppy scale, and provided their reactions to the vignettes on 5 point Likert scales, rating their Satisfaction, Amusement as well as attributions of Responsibility and Fairness, and willingness to support (Upvote or Donate). In a 2 × 2 Outcome (success/fail) by Context (original/plagiarised work) Multivariate Analysis of Variance there was significant disapproval of the successful plagiarist, and approval when the plagiarist failed. The strongest reactions elicited involved dissatisfaction and attributions of unfairness. Upvoting was less likely when plagiarism was reported. Strength of effects indicated that satisfaction and attributions of unfairness could be important components of people's reactions. Upvoting and willingness to donate in support were greater when the Professor was honest and outcomes were unfair. People were more concerned when a vignette suggested a breakdown of the social order.