trustmebro.to/r/…
✓ checked
trust me, bro:
here is the receipt.
the claim

People judge acts of commission more harshly than acts of omission.

the verdict
SUPPORTED
the evidence backs this
Recorded sources
3 sources for · 0 against

Counts group repeated records of the same source within each side. They do not measure evidence strength or source independence.

Is it true that people judge acts of commission more harshly than acts of omission?

Yes. Substantial psychological research demonstrates the omission bias, wherein individuals judge harmful acts of commission more harshly than equivalent acts of omission.

Verdict: SUPPORTED · 3 sources for, 0 against · Last checked

Evidence for · 3
Action and Inaction in Moral Judgments and Decisions: Meta-Analysis of Omission Bias Omission-Commission Asymmetries
2021
A comprehensive meta-analysis confirms the overall existence of the omission bias, showing that people evaluate harm caused by omission as less morally wrong than commission.
Get citation
Yeung, S. K., Yay, T., & Feldman, G. (2021). Action and Inaction in Moral Judgments and Decisions: Meta-Analysis of Omission Bias Omission-Commission Asymmetries. doi.org. https://doi.org/10.1177/01461672211042315

See more details
More for · 2
Regulatory focus as a predictor of omission bias in moral judgment: Mediating role of anticipated regrets
2014
This study reinforces that people are more reluctant to accept negative consequences caused by active choices compared to inaction.
Get citation
Chung, E. K., Kim, S. J., & Sohn, Y. W. (2014). Regulatory focus as a predictor of omission bias in moral judgment: Mediating role of anticipated regrets. doi.org. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajsp.12060

Omission Bias in Adolescence: Asymmetric Perceptions of Morality, Intentionality and Causality.
2025
Empirical evidence demonstrates that older adolescents and young adults rate harmful commissions as significantly more immoral than harmful omissions.
Get citation
Y, W., J, Z., & Y, S. (2025). Omission Bias in Adolescence: Asymmetric Perceptions of Morality, Intentionality and Causality.. doi.org. https://doi.org/10.1002/jad.12480

Receipt History
Anyone with this link can read the claim and its public receipt, including any personal information in that text. Open permanent receipt.
Check your own claim
Challenge the receipt
Requests are recorded for review. This does not start an automatic check or guarantee a response time.

See the evidence timeline

Citation formatting by citeproc-js (Frank Bennett) and the Citation Style Language project. Source and licenses.

This receipt is an automated verdict against our published method · not an opinion about any author or publication.
Terms · Privacy · How verdicts work