Demystifying Schadenfreude: How disposition theorizing explains responses to social media stories of unvaccinated COVID-19 deaths

Herman Cain Awards are presented on to individuals who share COVID-19 misinformation on social media (SM) and subsequently die from the disease. We apply affective disposition theory's moral judgment predictions regarding message and audience factors and Schadenfreude theorizing to explain reactions to similar SM posts. In an experiment with a large census-matched sample, participants viewed a series of SM posts similar to those on featured on . We manipulated two message factors: whether the poster was dogmatic or uncertain in their anti-COVID-19-vaccination stance and whether they expressed regret before they died. Dogmatic posting resulted in perceptions of the poster as more immoral and deserving of worse health outcomes, but regret mitigated these effects. Notably, political party and vaccination status, two audience factors, moderated these processes. Our findings demonstrate that SM posting is a morally relevant behavior and that narrative moral judgment theories seem capable of explaining reader's responses.