Dies ist eine Übersichtsseite mit Metadaten zu dieser wissenschaftlichen Arbeit. Der vollständige Artikel ist beim Verlag verfügbar.
Liberals and conservatives rely on different sets of moral foundations.
4.486
Zitationen
3
Autoren
2009
Jahr
Abstract
How and why do moral judgments vary across the political spectrum? To test moral foundations theory (J. Haidt & J. Graham, 2007; J. Haidt & C. Joseph, 2004), the authors developed several ways to measure people's use of 5 sets of moral intuitions: Harm/care, Fairness/reciprocity, Ingroup/loyalty, Authority/respect, and Purity/sanctity. Across 4 studies using multiple methods, liberals consistently showed greater endorsement and use of the Harm/care and Fairness/reciprocity foundations compared to the other 3 foundations, whereas conservatives endorsed and used the 5 foundations more equally. This difference was observed in abstract assessments of the moral relevance of foundation-related concerns such as violence or loyalty (Study 1), moral judgments of statements and scenarios (Study 2), "sacredness" reactions to taboo trade-offs (Study 3), and use of foundation-related words in the moral texts of religious sermons (Study 4). These findings help to illuminate the nature and intractability of moral disagreements in the American "culture war."
Ähnliche Arbeiten
The emotional dog and its rational tail: A social intuitionist approach to moral judgment.
2001 · 7.757 Zit.
Social Psychology of Intergroup Relations
1982 · 7.729 Zit.
Implicit social cognition: Attitudes, self-esteem, and stereotypes.
1995 · 6.267 Zit.
A study of normative and informational social influences upon individual judgment.
1955 · 4.671 Zit.
An fMRI Investigation of Emotional Engagement in Moral Judgment
2001 · 4.500 Zit.