Abstract: "Opposing someone on a contentious sociopolitical issue often prompts criticism and conflict. People may be tempted to reduce such acrimony by expressing neutrality. Across 11 studies with North American samples, we find that, although people commonly express neutrality on controversial issues, observers are skeptical of others’ neutrality, judging them as similarly moral as those who oppose them those who explicitly oppose them. Unpacking lay beliefs about why people express neutrality sheds light on this disjunction between responses to the neutral self versus the neutral other. Specifically, people render more favorable attributions for their own neutrality (e.g., true indecision) than do observers (e.g., apathy, strategic behavior). Therefore, while neutrality is an often-invoked strategy to manage impressions, it is unlikely to succeed in doing so."
Original article: "Indifferent or impartial? Actor–observer asymmetries in expressing and evaluating sociopolitical neutrality." - https://psycnet.apa.org/doiLanding?doi=10.1037%2Fxge0001835
Abstract: "Opposing someone on a contentious sociopolitical issue often prompts criticism and conflict. People may be tempted to reduce such acrimony by expressing neutrality. Across 11 studies with North American samples, we find that, although people commonly express neutrality on controversial issues, observers are skeptical of others’ neutrality, judging them as similarly moral as those who oppose them those who explicitly oppose them. Unpacking lay beliefs about why people express neutrality sheds light on this disjunction between responses to the neutral self versus the neutral other. Specifically, people render more favorable attributions for their own neutrality (e.g., true indecision) than do observers (e.g., apathy, strategic behavior). Therefore, while neutrality is an often-invoked strategy to manage impressions, it is unlikely to succeed in doing so."