Another Look at Moral Foundations Theory: Do Authoritarianism and Social Dominance Orientation Explain Liberal-Conservative Differences in “Moral” Intuitions?

Matthew Kugler, John T. Jost, Sharareh Noorbaloochi

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Moral foundations theorists propose that the moral domain should include not only “liberal” ethics of justice and care but also ostensibly “conservative” concerns about the virtues of ingroup loyalty, obedience to authority, and enforcement of purity standards. This proposal clashes with decades of research in political psychology connecting the latter set of characteristics to “the authoritarian personality.” We demonstrate that liberal-conservative differences in moral intuitions are statistically mediated by authoritarianism and social dominance orientation, so that conservatives’ greater valuation of ingroup, authority, and purity concerns is attributable to higher levels of authoritarianism, whereas liberals’ greater valuation of fairness and harm avoidance is attributable to lower levels of social dominance. We also find that ingroup, authority, and purity concerns are positively associated with intergroup hostility and support for discrimination, whereas concerns about fairness and harm avoidance are negatively associated with these variables. These findings might lead some to question the wisdom and appropriateness of efforts to “broaden” scientific conceptions of morality in such a way that preferences based on authoritarianism and social dominance are treated as moral—rather than amoral or even immoral—and suggest that the explicit goal of incorporating conservative ideology into the study of moral psychology (in order to increase ideological diversity) may lead researchers astray.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)413-431
Number of pages19
JournalSocial Justice Research
Volume27
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Nov 23 2014

Fingerprint

authoritarianism
intuition
fairness
political psychology
obedience
loyalty
morality
wisdom
personality
discrimination
ideology
psychology
justice
moral philosophy

Keywords

  • Authoritarianism
  • Ideology
  • Morality
  • Political orientation
  • Social dominance

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Sociology and Political Science
  • Anthropology
  • Law

Cite this

Another Look at Moral Foundations Theory : Do Authoritarianism and Social Dominance Orientation Explain Liberal-Conservative Differences in “Moral” Intuitions? / Kugler, Matthew; Jost, John T.; Noorbaloochi, Sharareh.

In: Social Justice Research, Vol. 27, No. 4, 23.11.2014, p. 413-431.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{801033c0be8247eaa5bcbe4e6389ca3d,
title = "Another Look at Moral Foundations Theory: Do Authoritarianism and Social Dominance Orientation Explain Liberal-Conservative Differences in “Moral” Intuitions?",
abstract = "Moral foundations theorists propose that the moral domain should include not only “liberal” ethics of justice and care but also ostensibly “conservative” concerns about the virtues of ingroup loyalty, obedience to authority, and enforcement of purity standards. This proposal clashes with decades of research in political psychology connecting the latter set of characteristics to “the authoritarian personality.” We demonstrate that liberal-conservative differences in moral intuitions are statistically mediated by authoritarianism and social dominance orientation, so that conservatives’ greater valuation of ingroup, authority, and purity concerns is attributable to higher levels of authoritarianism, whereas liberals’ greater valuation of fairness and harm avoidance is attributable to lower levels of social dominance. We also find that ingroup, authority, and purity concerns are positively associated with intergroup hostility and support for discrimination, whereas concerns about fairness and harm avoidance are negatively associated with these variables. These findings might lead some to question the wisdom and appropriateness of efforts to “broaden” scientific conceptions of morality in such a way that preferences based on authoritarianism and social dominance are treated as moral—rather than amoral or even immoral—and suggest that the explicit goal of incorporating conservative ideology into the study of moral psychology (in order to increase ideological diversity) may lead researchers astray.",
keywords = "Authoritarianism, Ideology, Morality, Political orientation, Social dominance",
author = "Matthew Kugler and Jost, {John T.} and Sharareh Noorbaloochi",
year = "2014",
month = "11",
day = "23",
doi = "10.1007/s11211-014-0223-5",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "27",
pages = "413--431",
journal = "Social Justice Research",
issn = "0885-7466",
publisher = "Springer New York",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Another Look at Moral Foundations Theory

T2 - Do Authoritarianism and Social Dominance Orientation Explain Liberal-Conservative Differences in “Moral” Intuitions?

AU - Kugler, Matthew

AU - Jost, John T.

AU - Noorbaloochi, Sharareh

PY - 2014/11/23

Y1 - 2014/11/23

N2 - Moral foundations theorists propose that the moral domain should include not only “liberal” ethics of justice and care but also ostensibly “conservative” concerns about the virtues of ingroup loyalty, obedience to authority, and enforcement of purity standards. This proposal clashes with decades of research in political psychology connecting the latter set of characteristics to “the authoritarian personality.” We demonstrate that liberal-conservative differences in moral intuitions are statistically mediated by authoritarianism and social dominance orientation, so that conservatives’ greater valuation of ingroup, authority, and purity concerns is attributable to higher levels of authoritarianism, whereas liberals’ greater valuation of fairness and harm avoidance is attributable to lower levels of social dominance. We also find that ingroup, authority, and purity concerns are positively associated with intergroup hostility and support for discrimination, whereas concerns about fairness and harm avoidance are negatively associated with these variables. These findings might lead some to question the wisdom and appropriateness of efforts to “broaden” scientific conceptions of morality in such a way that preferences based on authoritarianism and social dominance are treated as moral—rather than amoral or even immoral—and suggest that the explicit goal of incorporating conservative ideology into the study of moral psychology (in order to increase ideological diversity) may lead researchers astray.

AB - Moral foundations theorists propose that the moral domain should include not only “liberal” ethics of justice and care but also ostensibly “conservative” concerns about the virtues of ingroup loyalty, obedience to authority, and enforcement of purity standards. This proposal clashes with decades of research in political psychology connecting the latter set of characteristics to “the authoritarian personality.” We demonstrate that liberal-conservative differences in moral intuitions are statistically mediated by authoritarianism and social dominance orientation, so that conservatives’ greater valuation of ingroup, authority, and purity concerns is attributable to higher levels of authoritarianism, whereas liberals’ greater valuation of fairness and harm avoidance is attributable to lower levels of social dominance. We also find that ingroup, authority, and purity concerns are positively associated with intergroup hostility and support for discrimination, whereas concerns about fairness and harm avoidance are negatively associated with these variables. These findings might lead some to question the wisdom and appropriateness of efforts to “broaden” scientific conceptions of morality in such a way that preferences based on authoritarianism and social dominance are treated as moral—rather than amoral or even immoral—and suggest that the explicit goal of incorporating conservative ideology into the study of moral psychology (in order to increase ideological diversity) may lead researchers astray.

KW - Authoritarianism

KW - Ideology

KW - Morality

KW - Political orientation

KW - Social dominance

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84911984609&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84911984609&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/s11211-014-0223-5

DO - 10.1007/s11211-014-0223-5

M3 - Article

VL - 27

SP - 413

EP - 431

JO - Social Justice Research

JF - Social Justice Research

SN - 0885-7466

IS - 4

ER -