ABSTRACT
Outcome bias occurs when people evaluate decision quality based on the outcome rather than the intentions of the decision maker. We replicate these findings and extend them to the realms of policy and politics. Approximately equal numbers of Republicans and Democrats judged policy decisions aimed at ameliorating the deleterious effects of the COVID-19 pandemic. We manipulated the affiliation of the decider (Republican vs. Democrat) and the aim of the policy (benefits health vs. benefits the economy;benefits health but hurts the economy vs. benefits the economy but hurts health). The results revealed that policy decisions aimed at addressing health problems or aimed at repairing the economy without negative externalities in other spheres of life were evaluated solely as a function of outcome in which successful outcomes generated significantly greater quality ratings than failures. However, judgments of policy decisions aimed at helping one sphere of life but hurting another (i.e., business closures) were qualified by significant interactions with the political party affiliation of the decision maker and that of the participant. Republicans' responses show evidence for outcome bias while favoring Republican deciders. In contrast, Democrats exhibited a greater degree of outcome bias while favoring decisions that prioritized health over the economy relative to decisions that prioritized the economy over health. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved) Impact Statement What is the significance of this article for the general public?-Even though the COVID-19 pandemic is a health problem, a large proportion of people treated it as a political issue for which voters' political affiliation determined their response to the pandemic. Dealing effectively with the pandemic requires a unified response in a situation where health and the economy are frequently at loggerheads. Here we examined how voters think about policy decisions that aimed to address either public health or economic concerns stemming from the pandemic. In half of the cases, policies aimed at addressing one issue were detrimental to another. In general, people judge policy decisions as a function of their outcomes;however, they are more likely to be influenced by their political considerations when policies addressing one issue end up being detrimental to another. Specifically, Republicans' responses show evidence for outcome bias while favoring Republican deciders. In contrast, Democrats exhibited a greater degree of outcome bias while favoring decisions that prioritized health over the economy relative to decisions that prioritized the economy over health. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved)