Research grounded in the legitimacy-as-perception perspective has primarily conceptualized legitimacy as a socio-cognitive judgment, assuming that evaluators act in line with their propriety judgments by supporting legitimacy objects they deem appropriate and opposing those they judge as inappropriate. However, this assumed alignment between legitimacy judgments and behaviors has rarely been tested directly. Advancing a behavioral perspective of legitimacy therefore requires systematically examining when and why legitimacy manifests in action rather than judgment alone. We pursue this agenda through two experiments that disentangle evaluative and behavioral responses to legitimacy objects. Study 1 (MTurk; n = 1,889) manipulates self-interest through incentives, norm congruence through framing, and whether propriety judgments are measured prior to behavioral responses or not. Study 2 (Prolific; n = 801) replicates this design, focusing on norm congruence and propriety judgment measurement prior to behavioral responses. Our results reveal several inconsistencies between the evaluative and behavioral manifestations of legitimacy. Specifically, the effects of norm violations and self-interest on behavior diverge from their effects on propriety judgments. In addition, Study 1 reveals a “neutralization effect,” whereby eliciting propriety judgments attenuates behavioral responses, an effect that was not observed in Study 2. Together, these findings challenge the assumption that legitimacy judgments reliably translate into behavior and underscore the need to distinguish between evaluative and behavioral manifestations of legitimacy. By identifying conditions under which legitimacy judgments guide, or fail to guide, action, this study advances a behavioral perspective on legitimacy and offers methodological guidance for future experimental research.
Gruban et al. (Wed,) studied this question.