ABSTRACT
How do people judge criminal offenders whose early lives were marked by hardship? In three preregistered studies (total N = 893), we explored how emotional adversity (abuse and neglect) and economic disadvantage (poverty) shape judgments of criminal behavior. Participants evaluated fictional offenders after learning about their upbringing. Study 1 showed that both types of hardship independently reduced blame for criminal behavior, though neither reduced punishment. Mediation analyses indicated that the reduction of blame was driven by increased sympathy, diminished perceptions that the behavior expressed the offender’s moral character, and reduced perceived control over moral self-formation. Study 2 replicated the mitigating effect of abuse and neglect on blame but again found no moderation by economic status. Study 3 showed that poverty reduced both blame and punishment, especially for crimes plausibly motivated by financial need. Together, the findings suggest that emotional and economic hardship independently mitigate moral judgment through overlapping psychological mechanisms.