Decoding the Deservingness Heuristic: Perceptions and Bias

In the complex web of human judgment, the deservingness heuristic stands out as a guiding star, often illuminating the paths of our moral and social evaluations. This mental shortcut helps us to swiftly decide who gets what, based largely on perceptions of merit and effort. When we deem someone as having worked hard, our brains conclude they deserve success. Conversely, we’re quick to assign blame and negative outcomes to those perceived to have faltered. As convenient as this cognitive process may be, it’s a double-edged sword that can shape our perceptions and actions in ways we might not consciously recognize. Exploring the nuances of this heuristic can shed light on the subtle biases that color our daily interactions and decisions.

What is the Deservingness Heuristic?

The deservingness heuristic refers to the cognitive process by which individuals evaluate whether someone should receive certain outcomes based on perceived merits or entitlements. The deservingness heuristic plays a fundamental role in our judgements of sharing resources. These resources may even include whether or not we share sympathy and compassionate concern.

In the news this week, a man caught fire while participating in an illegal sideshow, taking over an intersection of a nearby city for nearly an hour. Not too far from the sideshow, in a nearby town, a toddler was grazed by a bullet fired from a gun in front of the child’s house. Without any conscious deliberation, my sympathies for the innocent child were activated while my concern over the burn victim was, well, minimal. The difference of sympathy was motivated by the deservingness heuristic.

This heuristic is manifest in various contexts, such as welfare distribution, workplace rewards, or even interpersonal relationships. Essentially, it simplifies complex decisions about fairness into more digestible judgments by focusing on an individual’s actions or characteristics rather than the broader context surrounding them.

Cognitive Heuristics

As a brief review, cognitive heuristics are mental shortcuts or rules of thumb that the human mind uses to simplify complex decision-making processes. These heuristics allow individuals to make quick judgments and decisions based on limited information and cognitive resources. Basically, with heuristics, we don’t need to reinvent the wheel every time we evaluate an element in the environment. This is an essential function for survival. The massive flow of information would bog us down, draining limited resources, leaving us frozen in a state of inaction.

In order to speed things up, we draw upon mental maps—or heuristics. Using cognitive heuristics is a strategy that “ignores part of the information, with the goal of making decisions more quickly, frugally, or accurately than more complex methods” (​​​Gigerenzer & Gaissmaier, 2011, p. 454).

Susan David PhD, a psychologist on the faculty of Harvard Medical School, explains:

“Life is just a hell of a lot easier when you don’t have to analyze every choice. If human beings lacked the predictive ability of heuristics…and needed to consciously process every facial expression, conversation, and piece of information anew, we’d have no time for actually living life” (David, 2016).

We need to use cognitive heuristics. However, we must be cautious of their use and occasionally fact check them for accuracy.

See Cognitive Heuristics for more on this topic

Key Components of Deservingness Heuristic

Moral Judgments

Moral judgments play a crucial role in the functioning of the deservingness heuristic, influencing how individuals assess who deserves certain outcomes or rewards based on perceived ethical considerations. This intersection between morality and deservingness shapes our decisions and social interactions in profound ways.

Moral judgment refers to the evaluations that individuals make about what is right or wrong, good or bad, just or unjust. These judgments are often influenced by cultural norms, personal beliefs, experiences, and societal values. When applying moral frameworks to evaluate situations involving others’ needs or behaviors, people use these moral assessments to determine deservingness.

In the context of the deservingness heuristic:

• Good Actions Merit Good Outcomes: Individuals tend to believe that positive behavior should result in positive consequences. For instance, someone who works hard and contributes meaningfully to their community may be seen as more deserving of support compared to someone viewed as apathetic or unproductive.
• Bad Actions Warrant Negative Outcomes: Conversely, when people perceive an individual’s misfortune as a result of poor choices (e.g., substance abuse leading to job loss), they may conclude that such individuals are less deserving of sympathy or assistance.

Attributions of Responsibility

Individuals may assess whether a person’s situation results from their own choices or external circumstances, such as socioeconomic background, family history, or systemic barriers that can affect one’s opportunities in life. These evaluations often lead to judgments about an individual’s character and their perceived deservingness of help or support. Those viewed as responsible for their plight—whether due to poor decision-making, lack of initiative, or other personal failings—are often deemed less deserving of compassion, aid, or social benefits, which can exacerbate feelings of isolation and alienation. Conversely, when circumstances beyond an individual’s control are acknowledged as significant factors, it can foster a greater sense of empathy and a collective responsibility for societal welfare.

Social Comparisons

Social comparisons play a significant role in shaping how individuals apply the deservingness heuristic, influencing judgments about who deserves certain outcomes or resources. This cognitive process involves evaluating oneself and others relative to different standards, often leading to perceptions of fairness and entitlement that are crucial for understanding social dynamics.

According to social comparison theory, initially proposed by Leon Festinger in 1954, posits that individuals determine their own social and personal worth based on how they stack up against others. These comparisons can be upward (comparing oneself to those perceived as better off) or downward (comparing with those perceived as worse off). In both cases, these evaluations affect self-esteem and perceptions of deservingness.

In the context of the deservingness heuristic:

• Relative Worth: People assess their own circumstances alongside those around them when considering who deserves help or rewards. For example, if someone perceives another individual as more successful despite less effort put forth, they may question why assistance is not directed towards themselves instead.
• Perceived Effort and Sacrifice: Individuals often compare inputs—such as hard work or sacrifices made—to outputs received (rewards or recognition). If one person feels they have exerted significantly more effort than another yet observes unequal outcomes, this discrepancy can lead them to believe that resources should be allocated differently based on merit.

Psychological Underpinnings

The deservingness heuristic is steeped in several psychological theories:

• Equity Theory posits that individuals strive for fairness in relationships and interactions; perceptions of equity influence how rewards and resources are allocated.
• Just World Hypothesis, developed by Melvin Lerner, suggests that people have a fundamental need to believe that the world is fair—that good things happen to good people and vice versa. When confronted with instances where this belief does not hold true (e.g., victims of misfortune), individuals may rationalize these events through assessments of deservingness.

Adaptive Evolutionary Causes of Deservingness

Research suggests that this heuristic is not a function of beliefs and values but acts independent of proclaimed beliefs. Kristina Hansen explains, “Current knowledge suggests that the deservingness heuristic operates independently of citizens’ values. The argument is that the deservingness heuristic is a universal psychological mechanism that evolved to regulate decisions about help giving in small-scale social interactions” (Hansen, 2019).

Michael Petersen and his colleagues explain that “the ‘deservingness heuristic’ spontaneously guides opinion formation whenever informational cues to the deservingness of welfare recipients are available. Importantly, from the automatic nature of the heuristic, we infer, first, that the impact of values decreases dramatically in the presence of deservingness-relevant cues, and second, that all citizens, regardless of their level of political sophistication, rely on perceptions of deservingness” (Petersen, et al. 2011).

Carsten Jensen and Petersen explain, “Humans have a long history predating modern times where sickness could ravage communities. Early communities operated with limited resources, allocating resources to those that most benefit the community not only made sense, but was essential for the communities survival” (Jensen & Petersen, 2017).

Implications for Social Behavior

Understanding the dynamics behind the deservingness heuristic has profound implications across multiple domains:

Welfare Policies

Public opinion regarding welfare programs often hinges on perceptions of who “deserves” assistance versus those viewed as undeserving due to laziness or poor decision-making. Such beliefs can significantly influence policy decisions and funding allocations.

The deservingness heuristic prompts citizens to support “social welfare provisions if they are exposed to cues that welfare recipients are unlucky victims of unfortunate circumstances (deserving) and oppose provision of social welfare if cues indicate that welfare recipients are lazy (undeserving) ” (Hansen, 2019).

Basically, in the words of Natán Skigin citizens support “benefits for those they perceive as victims of uncontrollable events and, hence, deserving of help, whereas they oppose benefits for those who are to blame for their own plight” (Skigin, 2024).

Workplace Dynamics

The deservingness heuristic sneaks into the workplace in interesting ways. We often judge colleagues’ worth based on perceived efforts and outcomes. If someone stays late, works hard, and gets results, we tend to believe they deserve promotions and praise. Conversely, if a colleague makes mistakes or seems less committed, we’re likely to think they deserve fewer rewards or opportunities.

This heuristic can shape office politics and team dynamics, influencing decisions on raises, recognitions, and even workload distribution. However, this mental shortcut isn’t always fair, as it doesn’t account for factors beyond an individual’s control, like personal circumstances or systemic biases. Moreover, or judgements of effort is also subjective. Our preconceptions of an individual quietly sneak in and taint our judgements. So while it helps streamline our judgments, it can also perpetuate unfairness. 

Interpersonal Relationships

In personal relationships, feelings related to deserved affection or support can lead individuals either toward closeness or conflict depending on how well each party believes they meet societal expectations regarding meritocracy. This concept comes from social exchange theory. George Homan, the author of social exchange theory wrote we should adopt the view that “interaction between persons is an exchange of goods, material and non-material” (Homan, 1958).

The idea is that relationships work best with fair exchange. In the context of the deservingness heuristic, if we believe we consistently give more than what we get from a particular relationship the bonds of the relationship begin to fray.

Challenges Associated with Deservingness Evaluations

While heuristics like these offer efficiency in judgment-making processes, they come with significant drawbacks:

• They risk oversimplifying complex situations leading us away from empathy—for example, ignoring systemic barriers affecting marginalized groups. Sometimes, we need to be forward looking rather than backward judging. What this means is sometimes resources can be better allocated by an evaluation on how they will impact individuals and groups in the future rather than a judgment of how these individuals or groups have performed in the past.
• The potential for bias emerges strongly; cultural differences impact views on what constitutes ‘deserved’ outcomes differently across societies.
• It could perpetuate stigma against disadvantaged populations when society collectively decides who warrants compassion based solely upon subjective criteria rather than equitable assessment standards rooted in shared humanity.

Associated Concepts

• Primal World Beliefs: These beliefs, also known as core beliefs or basic assumptions, are fundamental psychological concepts that shape a person’s perception of themselves, others, and the world. These beliefs are often formed early in life and are deeply ingrained. They influence how individuals interpret and respond to various situations.
• Moral Licensing: Moral licensing refers to a self-righteous stance, elevating oneself above others because of perceived moral superiority.
• Empathy: In psychology, empathy is divided into several categories. Empathy is an underlying state that can help transverse the negative effects of deservingness heuristics.
• Victim Blaming: This concept refers to alleviating discomforting affect from observing the misfortune of others by blaming the victim for their own misdeeds.
• Self-Fulfilling Prophecies: This is a belief or expectation that, when held by an individual, influences their behavior and actions in a way that ultimately causes the belief or expectation to come true.
• Cognitive Interpretations: Cognitive interpretations refer to the mental processes through which individuals perceive, analyze, and make sense of the information they encounter. In the context of psychology and cognitive science, cognitive interpretations encompass the various ways in which individuals interpret and attribute meaning to stimuli, experiences, and situations.
• Social Categorization: This is a subconscious process shaping our perceptions and behaviors. It involves heuristics, biases, and group dynamics, impacting interpersonal interactions and fostering prejudice or solidarity. Understanding it promotes empathy and reduces conflict.

A Few Words by Psychology Fanatic

The deservingness heuristic highlights an essential aspect of human cognition—the tendency to judge worthiness based on perceived merits rather than objective realities alone leads us down pathways laden with both insightfulness but also pitfalls associated with biasing perspectives around equity & justice issues prevalent today . As we navigate our increasingly interconnected world , fostering awareness surrounding these cognitive biases allows us not only deepen understandings but promote inclusive dialogues aimed at rethinking notions tied closely together between morality , equality & community resilience moving forward .

Last Update: September 4, 2025

References:

​​​Festinger, Leon (1954). A Theory of Social Comparison Processes. Human Relations, 7(2), 117-140. DOI: 10.1177/001872675400700202
(Return to Article)

Gigerenzer, Gerd & Gaissmaier, Wolfgang (2011). Heuristic Decision Making. Annual Review Of Psychology, 62. DOI: 10.1146/annurev-psych-120709-145346
(Return to Article)

Hansen, Kristina (2019). Who Cares If They Need Help? The Deservingness Heuristic, Humanitarianism, and Welfare Opinions. Political Psychology, 40(2), 413-430. DOI: 10.1111/pops.12506
(Return to Article)

Homans, George C. (1958). Social Behavior as Exchange. American Journal of Sociology; vol 63, No. 6.
(Return to Article)

Jensen, Carsten & Petersen, Michael Bang (2017). The Deservingness Heuristic and the Politics of Health Care. American Journal of Political Science, 61(1), 68-83. DOI: 10.1111/ajps.12251
(Return to Article)

Petersen, Michael, Slothuus, Rune, Stubager, Rune, & Togeby, Lise (2011). Deservingness versus values in public opinion on welfare: The automaticity of the deservingness heuristic. European Journal of Political Research, 50(1). DOI: 10.1111/j.1475-6765.2010.01923.x
(Return to Article)

Skigin, Natán (2024). Prosocial behavior amid violence: The deservingness heuristic and solidarity with victims. Political Psychology, 45(2), 341-361. DOI: 10.1111/pops.12926
(Return to Article)

Topic Specific Databases:

PSYCHOLOGY – EMOTIONS – RELATIONSHIPS – WELLNESS – PSYCHOLOGY TOPICS

The information provided in this blog is for general informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. It is essential to consult with a qualified healthcare professional for any health concerns or before making any significant changes to your lifestyle or treatment plan.