Browse
Submit Data
Databases
API
Help

Dataset Information

35 Views

0 Connections

0 Citations

0 Reanalyses

0 Downloads

Omics score: 0

Conservatives' Moral Foundations Are More Densely Connected Than Liberals' Moral Foundations.

ABSTRACT: We use network psychometrics to map a subsection of moral belief systems predicted by moral foundations theory (MFT). This approach conceptualizes moral systems as networks, with moral beliefs represented as nodes connected by direct relations. As such, it advances a novel test of MFT's claim that liberals and conservatives have different systems of foundational moral values, which we test in three large datasets (N_Sample1 = 854; N_Sample2 = 679; N_Sample3 = 2,572), from two countries (the United States and New Zealand). Results supported our first hypothesis that liberals' moral systems show more segregation between individualizing and binding foundations than conservatives. Results showed only weak support for our second hypothesis, that this pattern would be more typical of higher educated than less educated liberals/conservatives. Findings support a systems approach to MFT and show the value of modeling moral belief systems as networks.

SUBMITTER: Turner-Zwinkels FM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8164548 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Json Xml

Similar Datasets

Moving Morality Beyond the In-Group: Liberals and Conservatives Show Differences on Group-Framed Moral Foundations and These Differences Mediate the Relationships to Perceived Bias and Threat.

Project description:Moral foundations research suggests that liberals care about moral values related to individual rights such as harm and fairness, while conservatives care about those foundations in addition to caring more about group rights such as loyalty, authority, and purity. However, the question remains about how conservatives and liberals differ in relation to group-level moral principles. We used two versions of the moral foundations questionnaire with the target group being either abstract or specific ingroups or outgroups. Across three studies, we observed that liberals showed more endorsement of Individualizing foundations (Harm and Fairness foundations) with an outgroup target, while conservatives showed more endorsement of Binding foundations (Loyalty, Authority, and Purity foundations) with an ingroup target. This general pattern was found when the framed, target-group was abstract (i.e., 'ingroups' and 'outgroups' in Study 1) and when target groups were specified about a general British-ingroup and an immigrant-outgroup (Studies 2 and 3). In Studies 2 and 3, both Individualizing-Ingroup Preference and Binding-Ingroup Preference scores predicted more Attitude Bias and more Negative Attitude Bias toward immigrants (Studies 2 and 3), more Implicit Bias (Study 3), and more Perceived Threat from immigrants (Studies 2 and 3). We also demonstrated that increasing liberalism was associated with less Attitude Bias and less Negative Bias toward immigrants (Studies 2 and 3), less Implicit Bias (Study 3), and less Perceived Threat from immigrants (Studies 2 and 3). Outgroup-individualizing foundations and Ingroup-Binding foundations showed different patterns of mediation of these effects.

| S-EPMC8096906 | biostudies-literature

Boosting Belligerence: How the July 7, 2005, London Bombings Affected Liberals' Moral Foundations and Prejudice.

Project description:Major terrorist events, such as the recent attacks in Ankara, Sinai, and Paris, can have profound effects on a nation's values, attitudes, and prejudices. Yet psychological evidence testing the impact of such events via data collected immediately before and after an attack is understandably rare. In the present research, we tested the independent and joint effects of threat (the July 7, 2005, London bombings) and political ideology on endorsement of moral foundations and prejudices among two nationally representative samples (combined N = 2,031) about 6 weeks before and 1 month after the London bombings. After the bombings, there was greater endorsement of the in-group foundation, lower endorsement of the fairness-reciprocity foundation, and stronger prejudices toward Muslims and immigrants. The differences in both the endorsement of the foundations and the prejudices were larger among people with a liberal orientation than among those with a conservative orientation. Furthermore, the changes in endorsement of moral foundations among liberals explained their increases in prejudice. The results highlight the value of psychological theory and research for understanding societal changes in attitudes and prejudices after major terrorist events.

| S-EPMC4750069 | biostudies-literature

Conservatives Report Greater Meaning in Life than Liberals.

Project description:Conservatives report greater life satisfaction than liberals, but this relationship is relatively weak. To date, the evidence is limited to a narrow set of well-being measures that ask participants for a single assessment of their life in general. We address this shortcoming by examining the relationship between political orientation and well-being using measures of life satisfaction, affect, and meaning and purpose in life. Participants completed well-being measures after reflecting on their whole life (Studies 1a, 1b, and 2), at the end of their day (Study 3), and in the present moment (Study 4). Across five studies, conservatives reported more meaning and purpose in life than liberals at each reporting period. This finding remained significant after adjusting for religiosity and was usually stronger than the relationships involving other well-being measures. Finally, meaning in life was more closely related to social conservatism than economic conservatism.

| S-EPMC6764755 | biostudies-literature

Conservatives and liberals have similar physiological responses to threats.

Project description:About a decade ago, a study documented that conservatives have stronger physiological responses to threatening stimuli than liberals. This work launched an approach aimed at uncovering the biological roots of ideology. Despite wide-ranging scientific and popular impact, independent laboratories have not replicated the study. We conducted a pre-registered direct replication (n?=?202) and conceptual replications in the United States (n?=?352) and the Netherlands (n?=?81). Our analyses do not support the conclusions of the original study, nor do we find evidence for broader claims regarding the effect of disgust and the existence of a physiological trait. Rather than studying unconscious responses as the real predispositions, alignment between conscious and unconscious responses promises deeper insights into the emotional roots of ideology.

| S-EPMC7306406 | biostudies-literature

Dining with liberals and conservatives: The social underpinnings of food neophobia.

Project description:Although food and politics seem to be distant domains, socio-political ideology and food neophobia (i.e., reluctance to eat unfamiliar food) may be related. Conservatives' high threat sensitivity and the inherently threatening nature of novel foods (the existential explanation), along with conservatives' negative attitudes toward minority outgroups (e.g., foreigners) and the role of the latter in introducing novel foods to a culture (the social explanation), led us to expect that socio-political ideology would predict food neophobia over and above their common roots. Across two correlational and two experimental studies (N = 627), socio-political ideology emerged as a strong predictor of food neophobia. In addition, the findings did not support the existential explanation, while confirming the social explanation of the ideology-food neophobia link: Conservatives seem more neophobic than liberals not because of their higher threat sensitivity but rather because they hold more negative attitudes toward foreigners who are associated with those foods.

| S-EPMC8794126 | biostudies-literature

Liberals lecture, conservatives communicate: Analyzing complexity and ideology in 381,609 political speeches.

Project description:There is some evidence that liberal politicians use more complex language than conservative politicians. This evidence, however, is based on a specific set of speeches of US members of Congress and UK members of Parliament. This raises the question whether the relationship between ideology and linguistic complexity is a more general phenomenon or specific to this small group of politicians. To address this question, this paper analyzes 381,609 speeches given by politicians from five parliaments, by twelve European prime ministers, as well as speeches from party congresses over time and across countries. Our results replicate and generalize earlier findings: speakers from culturally liberal parties use more complex language than speakers from culturally conservative parties. Economic left-right differences, on the other hand, are not systematically linked to linguistic complexity.

| S-EPMC6364865 | biostudies-literature

Expression of Concern: Liberals lecture, conservatives communicate: Analyzing complexity and ideology in 381,609 political speeches.

Project description: Not available

| S-EPMC9662719 | biostudies-literature

Moral Foundations Questionnaire and Moral Foundations Sacredness Scale: Assessing the Factorial Structure of the Dutch Translations.

Project description:The Moral Foundations Questionnaire (MFQ) and the Moral Foundations Sacredness Scale (MFSS) have been proposed to advance conceptualizations of morality. This study assesses the factor structure of the Dutch translations of the short version of the MFQ (20 items) and the full MFSS. The five-factor model posited by Moral Foundations Theory (MFT) is compared against alternative models of morality. Correlational analyses are performed between the best-fitting models. A multi-group confirmatory factor analysis of the optimal model is tested across gender. Data are taken from an online survey of a student sample (N = 1496). Results suggest that the Dutch translation of the MFQ20 does not converge on the proposed five-factor model. Conversely, MFSS subscales show good model fit, but intercorrelations among the five subscales are high. Weak invariance is retained for MFSS but not for MFQ20. Overall, the present study shows that the Dutch version of the MFSS scale performs better than the MFQ20 in terms of scale reliability, fit indices, and measurement invariance testing. More methodological inquiries on MFSS are welcomed, whereas the use of the MFQ20 should be discouraged. Instead, researchers on moral foundations are encouraged to empirically test the psychometric properties of the recently revised MFQ-2, developed by the authors of MFT as a more accurate instrument for the conceptualization of morality.

| S-EPMC10376904 | biostudies-literature

The moral foundations of illusory correlation.

Project description:Previous research has studied the relationship between political ideology and cognitive biases, such as the tendency of conservatives to form stronger illusory correlations between negative infrequent behaviors and minority groups. We further explored these findings by studying the relation between illusory correlation and moral values. According to the moral foundations theory, liberals and conservatives differ in the relevance they concede to different moral dimensions: Care, Fairness, Loyalty, Authority, and Purity. Whereas liberals consistently endorse the Care and Fairness foundations more than the Loyalty, Authority and Purity foundations, conservatives tend to adhere to the five foundations alike. In the present study, a group of participants took part in a standard illusory correlation task in which they were presented with randomly ordered descriptions of either desirable or undesirable behaviors attributed to individuals belonging to numerically different majority and minority groups. Although the proportion of desirable and undesirable behaviors was the same in the two groups, participants attributed a higher frequency of undesirable behaviors to the minority group, thus showing the expected illusory correlation effect. Moreover, this effect was specifically associated to our participants' scores in the Loyalty subscale of the Moral Foundations Questionnaire. These results emphasize the role of the Loyalty moral foundation in the formation of attitudes towards minorities among conservatives. Our study points out the moral system as a useful fine-grained framework to explore the complex interaction between basic cognitive processes and ideology.

| S-EPMC5626483 | biostudies-literature

Neuro-Computational Foundations of Moral Preferences.

Project description:Moral preferences pervade many aspects of our lives, dictating how we ought to behave, whom we can marry, and even what we eat. Despite their relevance, one fundamental question remains unanswered: Where do individual moral preferences come from? It is often thought that all types of preferences reflect properties of domain-general neural decision mechanisms that employ a common "neural currency" to value choice options in many different contexts. This view, however, appears at odds with the observation that many humans consider it intuitively wrong to employ the same scale to compare moral value (e.g., of a human life) with material value (e.g., of money). In this paper, we directly test if moral subjective values are represented by similar neural processes as financial subjective values. In a study combining fMRI with a novel behavioral paradigm, we identify neural representations of the subjective values of human lives or financial payoffs by means of structurally identical computational models. Correlating isomorphic model variables from both domains with brain activity reveals specific patterns of neural activity that selectively represent values in the moral (rTPJ) or financial (vmPFC) domain. Intriguingly, our findings show that human lives and money are valued in (at least partially) distinct neural currencies, supporting theoretical proposals that human moral behavior is guided by processes that are distinct from those underlying behavior driven by personal material benefit.

| S-EPMC8881635 | biostudies-literature

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

OmicsDI is an Elixir interoperability service. Learn more ›

Tweets

OmicsDI Databases

PRIDE
PeptideAtlas
MassIVE
JPOST Repository
Physiome Model Repository

EGA
EVA
ENA
LINCS
PAXDB
Cell Collective

MetaboLights
Metabolomics Workbench
MetabolomeExpress
GNPS
BioModels
FAIRDOMHub

ArrayExpress
dbGaP
ExpressionAtlas
GEO
NODE

Information

Databases
Help
API
Contact us
Code on GitHub
Terms of use
Submit Data