As global audiences follow ongoing conflicts, stories of personal sacrifice often stand out. New research from the Kelley School of Business shows that people across the United States consistently view self-sacrificial actions as more heroic and inspiring—even when they lead to the same outcome.
Christopher Olivola, associate professor of marketing at the Kelley School of Business in Indianapolis, refers to this phenomenon as the “martyrdom effect.” He explores it in his study, “The Martyrdom Effect in Judgment: Fatal Self-Sacrifice Boosts Evaluations for Both Beneficial and Harmful Actors,” recently published in the Journal of Behavioral Decision Making.
“Simply put, people praise fatal self-sacrifice, even if the same kind of outcome could have been achieved without the person dying,” Chris said.
In the research, participants evaluated a series of hypothetical scenarios. In one, set during World War II, a soldier encounters enemy forces preparing an attack that would kill his fellow soldiers.
In one version of the scenario, an American soldier throws grenades from a distance, eliminating the enemy threat and surviving. In another version, the American soldier sacrifices his life by detonating grenades strapped to his body, killing both himself and the enemy forces.
Chris found that participants consistently rated the self-sacrificing soldier as more heroic, inspiring, and moral—even though both scenarios produced the same outcome.
What surprised Chris even more was how participants responded when the roles were reversed.
“In the case where the protagonist is a Nazi soldier who eliminates the threat of an American counterattack without dying himself, participants give him a negative rating,” Chris said. “But when the Nazi soldier sacrifices his life to kill American soldiers, participants rate him more positively compared to when he survives. Even when people strongly dislike the protagonist and his cause, they still respond positively to the act of self-sacrifice.”
The findings point to a deeper tension in how people interpret sacrifice: admiration often centers on dedication itself, rather than whether that dedication serves the right goal. It raises an important question—not just in extreme scenarios, but in everyday decisions: Are we valuing effort, or effectiveness?
Chris also examined the role of intent. What happens when someone intends to sacrifice their life but survives, or does not intend to die but dies accidentally?
“Intent alone isn’t enough to boost evaluations,” Chris said. “That boost only occurs when someone both intends to sacrifice their life and actually does so. If they survive or die accidentally, they don’t receive the same increase in perceived heroism or morality. That was one of the most surprising findings.”
The study builds on Chris’ earlier work exploring why people willingly exert effort and experience discomfort to support charitable causes—such as running marathons or participating in fundraising challenges.
“I became interested in expanding this idea of sacrifice,” he said. “My previous research showed that people value and praise effort and hardship when it serves an important goal. This project extends that idea and reveals how powerful—and sometimes surprising—those perceptions can be.”
For Chris, the findings offer insight into how people interpret acts of sacrifice across different contexts.
“This instinct to praise sacrifice can shape what we think is admirable or meaningful,” Chris said. “It helps explain why certain actions are seen as especially heroic, even when they don’t lead to better outcomes.”
He hopes the research encourages readers to think more carefully about how they evaluate these situations.
“I hope this work gives people a better understanding of how the human mind works—and some of the surprising ways it works,” Chris said. “It also invites us to take a closer look at what sacrifice accomplishes and how we define something as meaningful or worthwhile.”