The hypotheses were tested through correlational and experimental studies and were updated. In particular, we found support for three of the original hypotheses (H1, H2, H5). In contrast, we found support against H3 and 4: heroised groups are more likely to be perceived as suffering, and more likely to be supported in their demands.

In order to explain these unexpected findings, we updated our hypotheses. In contrast to our hypotheses, heroised groups are more supported in their demands (H3) – this runs against findings that heroic groups are exploited (Stanley & Kay, 2024, study 5). We therefore hypothesise that, despite the perception that heroic groups would willingly accept exploitative policies (H6), participants are less likely to support exploitative policies for heroised workers (H7).

In addition, our findings that heroised groups are perceived as suffering more (H4) further led us to hypothesise that heroised workers are perceived as more willing to suffer (H8). In this view, victims and heroes are similar in the extent to which they would be perceived as suffering — but heroic groups differ from victims in the extent to which this suffering is perceived as chosen.

We surveyed 300 participants (representative UK residents) and asked them to evaluate the heroism and their support for de-regulating the occupations and protecting them from consequences upon breaking the rules. We found that heroism predicted support for deregulating occupations above and beyond attitude, across all six target occupations (journalists, underwater welders, psychiatrists, nurses, firefighters, and soldiers). Looking at occupations individually, we observed especially large effect sizes for soldiers and journalists (two occupations that can be described as villains by some participants). In contrast, nurses did not appear to derive a similar moral shield from their heroic status.

The study was registered. Full details on our analyses can be found online.

Ethics: 2025175682910010087 (Approved September, 02, 2025)

In a large correlational study (N = 816), we assessed the correlates of perceived heroism across 6 occupations (firefighters, soldiers, nurses, psychiatrists, underwater welders, and journalists). We found strong correlational support for the following original hypotheses:

• Heroised groups are the recipient of gratefulness
• Heroised groups are shielded from criticism and hate speech
• Heroised groups are shielded from consequences of rule-breaking through increased support for de-regulating heroised occupations, and support for protecting rule-breakers from legal prosecutions

In contrast to our initial hypotheses, we found strong correlational support that:

• Heroised groups are perceived as suffering more
• Heroised groups are more likely to be supported in their demands for improving their work conditions

Following this correlational studies, we updated our hypotheses (see Table 2).

The study was registered. Full details on our analyses can be found online.

Ethics: 2025175820653410122 (Approved September, 18, 2025)

Using the manipulations of heroism validated as part of the project (see Causes), we evaluated the causal effects of framing occupations as exposed to risk and helpful (two manipulations that were proved to significantly influence the perception of heroism across several occupations) on our updated hypotheses. We evaluated our hypotheses using two neutral occupations that were shown to be perceived as more heroic when describing them as exposed to risk or helpful (Underwater welders and psychiatrists).

Our findings regarding each of our hypotheses are summarised below:

H1. Gratitude
Participants expressed greater gratitude toward occupations framed as exposed to risk or helpful.

H2. Shielding from criticism
Participants were more likely to shield occupations framed as exposed to risk or helpful from criticism, although this effect emerged only for the general-level measure.

H3. Support for workers’ demands
Participants were more likely to support demands from occupations framed as exposed to risk, but not those framed as helpful, and this effect emerged only for the specific-level measure.

H4. Perceived suffering
Participants were more likely to perceive workers from occupations framed as exposed to risk as suffering (but not those framed as helpful).

H5. Protection of rule-breaking workers
Participants were more likely to support protecting rule-breaking workers from occupations framed as exposed to risk, but not those framed as helpful, and this effect emerged only for the general-level measure.

H6. Perceived acceptance of exploitative policies
Participants were more likely to perceive workers from occupations framed as exposed to risk or helpful as willing to accept exploitative policies.

H7. Support for exploitative policies
Participants were less likely to support exploitative policies for workers from occupations framed as exposed to risk, but not those framed as helpful.

H8. Perceived willingness to endure pain
Participants were more likely to perceive workers from occupations framed as exposed to risk as willing to endure greater pain, but not those framed as helpful, and this effect emerged only for the general-level measure.

___

The study was registered. Full details on [TBC].

Ethics: 2026177151095310280 (Approved February, 19, 2026)