Harmful agents were perceived to possess less agency than neutral or benevolent agents, consistent with dehumanization.

Evidence

Across six studies, harmful agents were perceived to possess less agency than neutral (non-offending) and benevolent agents, consistent with a dehumanization perspective but inconsistent with the assumptions of moral typecasting theory. This was observed for human targets (Studies 1-2b, and 4-5) and corporations (Study 3), and across various gradations of harmfulness (Studies 3-4). — Mansur Khamitov, Jeff D. Rotman, and Jared Piazza, Perceiving the Agency of Harmful Agents, 9

Categorization

• XREF: This is the head-to-head verdict the reader wants: it directly contradicts moral typecasting theory’s prediction of heightened agency for harm-doers, echoing the dehumanization side of the separate ideology-relabeling debate. — connects to: Accusations of extreme wrongdoing can dehumanize scapegoats. — Lynley Hood, A City Possessed, 82; Dehumanizing portrayals can lead victims to be seen as less capable of suffering and less deserving of humane treatment. — 5 Reasons Why People Blame Victims; Dehumanization entails exclusion from the moral category of human, leaving persons vulnerable to harm with no moral consideration given to their experiences. — Dehumanization in the Global Migration Crisis (+4 more)
• corroborated: 3 independent passages support this claim — Mansur Khamitov, Jeff D. Rotman, and Jared Piazza, Perceiving the Agency of Harmful…, 9