Liberal paternalism: Weak-victim narratives are common, especially among liberals, and facilitate the disempowering treatment of groups that face disadvantage

Groups that face systemic disadvantage, such as refugees or people facing poverty, are sometimes viewed as essentially weak, passive victims. We show that weak-victim narratives are common, especially among liberals: they are well-represented in media, especially liberal media (Study 1), and commonly endorsed, especially by liberals (Studies 2a, 2c, 4, & Supplementary Study 1). What leads people and especially liberals to endorse weak-victim narratives? Weak-victim narratives conflate weakness (“weak”) with a sympathetic recognition of disadvantage (“victim”; Study 2b). This ambiguity facilitates their endorsement among liberals and their contribution to paternalistic behavior (Study 2c). Relatedly, mediation analyses (Studies 2a, 2c, & Supplementary Study 1) and experimental data (Study 2d) show that the perception of disadvantage, which is more pronounced among liberals, contributes to narrative’s endorsement. Experimental data also suggest that people sometimes endorse the weak-victim narrative strategically when seeking approval from liberals (Study 3). What are consequences? Correlational and experimental evidence show that the weak-victim narrative, as compared to a strong-agent narrative, leads liberals to see members of disadvantaged groups as less strong and agentic (Studies 4, 5, & 7) and to treat people in ways that are functionally disempowering: donating more money to disempowering rather than empowering aid organizations known to undermine recipients’ confidence in their abilities through paternalistic representations of aid (Studies 5-6), and encouraging students to quit challenging but valuable learning opportunities (Studies 2c & 7). Eleven studies (Ntotal=1,948) point to a novel mechanism, common among liberals, that facilitates the disempowering treatment of disadvantaged groups.