Book contents
- The Cambridge Handbook of Political Psychology
- The Cambridge Handbook of Political Psychology
- Copyright page
- Dedication
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Contributors
- Part I Foundations of Political Psychology
- Part II The Politics of Intergroup Attitudes
- 11 Authoritarianism
- 12 A Political Psychology of Ethnocentrism
- 13 Collective Narcissism
- 14 Demographic Change, White Decline, and the Changing Nature of Racial Politics in Election Campaigns
- 15 Macro-diversity and Intergroup Attitudes
- 16 The Persistence of Gender in Campaigns and Elections
- 17 The Politics of Abortion, Pregnancy, and Motherhood
- 18 Religiosity and Openness to Authoritarian Governance
- 19 The Consequences of Moral Conviction in Politics
- 20 The Political Psychology of National Identity
- 21 The Political Dynamics of Immigration Opinion Worldwide
- 22 International and Individual Differences in Support for Human Rights
- Part III Contemporary Challenges to Democracy
- Part IV Diversifying Perspectives in Political Psychology
- Index
- References
19 - The Consequences of Moral Conviction in Politics
More Negative Than Positive?
from Part II - The Politics of Intergroup Attitudes
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 17 February 2022
Book contents
- The Cambridge Handbook of Political Psychology
- The Cambridge Handbook of Political Psychology
- Copyright page
- Dedication
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Contributors
- Part I Foundations of Political Psychology
- Part II The Politics of Intergroup Attitudes
- 11 Authoritarianism
- 12 A Political Psychology of Ethnocentrism
- 13 Collective Narcissism
- 14 Demographic Change, White Decline, and the Changing Nature of Racial Politics in Election Campaigns
- 15 Macro-diversity and Intergroup Attitudes
- 16 The Persistence of Gender in Campaigns and Elections
- 17 The Politics of Abortion, Pregnancy, and Motherhood
- 18 Religiosity and Openness to Authoritarian Governance
- 19 The Consequences of Moral Conviction in Politics
- 20 The Political Psychology of National Identity
- 21 The Political Dynamics of Immigration Opinion Worldwide
- 22 International and Individual Differences in Support for Human Rights
- Part III Contemporary Challenges to Democracy
- Part IV Diversifying Perspectives in Political Psychology
- Index
- References
Summary
Associating a social or political attitude with one’s subjective sense of moral right and wrong (i.e., imbuing the attitude with 'moral conviction') is related to a variety of positive and negative consequences. For example, holding an attitude with moral conviction predicts greater political engagement such as voting – a normatively positive outcome. However, it also predicts greater political intolerance – a normatively negative outcome. In this chapter, we review literature exploring moral conviction’s consequences and note that the majority of them are normatively negative. We propose two possible explanations for this 'negativity bias' in the past research. On the one hand, the asymmetry in favour of negative consequences could be due to moral conviction having more negative rather than positive outcomes. On the other hand, the asymmetry could result from researchers selecting particularly polarised issues that lead to negative outcomes rather than issues with moral consensus, which may have positive outcomes.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- The Cambridge Handbook of Political Psychology , pp. 298 - 310Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2022
References
Aramovich, N. P., Lytle, B. L., & Skitka, L. J. (2012). Opposing torture: Moral conviction and resistance to majority influence. Social Influence, 7(1), 21–34. https://doi.org/10.1080/15534510.2011.640199Google Scholar
Bassili, J. N. (1996). Meta-judgmental versus operative indexes of psychological attributes: The case of measures of attitude strength. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71(4), 637–653. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.71.4.637CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baumeister, R. F., Bratslavsky, E., Finkenauer, C., & Vohs, K. D. (2001). Bad is stronger than good. Review of General Psychology, 5(4), 323–370. https://doi.org/10.1037/1089-2680.5.4.323Google Scholar
Baumgartner, J. N., & Morgan, G. S. (2019). Mindfulness and cognitive depletion shape the relationship between moral conviction and intolerance of dissimilar others. Studia Psychologica, 61(1), 31–41. https://doi.org/10.21909/sp.2019.01.770Google Scholar
Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, 347 U.S. 483 (1954). https://www.oyez.org/cases/1940-1955/347us483Google Scholar
Corns, J. (2018). Rethinking the negativity bias. Review of Philosophy and Psychology, 9(3), 607–625. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13164-018-0382-7CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Delton, A. W., DeScioli, P., & Ryan, T. J. (2020). Moral obstinacy in political negotiations. Political Psychology, 41(1), 3–20. https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.12612CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Garrett, K. N. (2018). Fired up by morality: The unique physiological response tied to moral conviction in politics. Political Psychology, 40(3), 543–563. https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.12527Google Scholar
Garrett, K. N., & Bankert, A. (2018). The moral roots of partisan division: How moral conviction heightens affective polarization. British Journal of Political Science, 50(2), 621–640. https://doi.org/10.1017/S000712341700059XGoogle Scholar
Haidt, J. (2001). The emotional dog and its rational tail: A social intuitionist approach to moral judgment. Psychological Review, 108(4), 814–834. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.108.4.814Google Scholar
Hornsey, M. J., Majkut, L., Terry, D. J., & McKimmie, B. M. (2003). On being loud and proud: Non‐conformity and counter‐conformity to group norms. British Journal of Social Psychology, 42(3), 319–335. https://doi.org/10.1348/014466603322438189Google Scholar
Janoff-Bulman, R., & Carnes, N. C. (2013). Surveying the moral landscape: Moral motives and group-based moralities. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 17(3), 219–236. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868313480274CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Janoff-Bulman, R., Sheikh, S., & Hepp, S. (2009). Proscriptive versus prescriptive morality: Two faces of moral regulation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96(3), 521–537. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0013779CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kende, A., Lantos, N. A., Belinszky, A., Csaba, S., & Lukács, Z. A. (2017). The politicized motivations of volunteers in the refugee crisis: Intergroup helping as the means to achieve social change. Journal of Social and Political Psychology, 5(1), 260–281. https://doi.org/10.5964/jspp.v5i1.642CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mazzoni, D., van Zomeren, M., & Cicognani, E. (2015). The motivating role of perceived right violation and efficacy beliefs in identification with the Italian water movement. Political Psychology, 36(3), 315–330. https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.12101Google Scholar
Morgan, G. S. (2011). Toward a model of morally convicted behavior: Investigating mediators of the moral conviction-action link [Dissertation]. University of Illinois at Chicago.Google Scholar
Morgan, G. S., & Skitka, L. J. (2020). Evidence for meta-ethical monism: Moral conviction predicts perceived objectivity and universality across issues. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Society for Personality and Social Psychology. New Orleans, LA.Google Scholar
Morgan, G. S., Skitka, L. J., & Wisneski, D. C. (2010). Moral and religious convictions and intentions to vote in the 2008 presidential election. Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy, 10(1), 307–320. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1530-2415.2010.01204.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mueller, A. B., & Skitka, L. J. (2017). Liars, damned liars, and zealots: The effect of moral mandates on transgressive advocacy acceptance. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550617720272Google Scholar
Mullen, E., & Nadler, J. (2008). Moral spillovers: The effect of moral violations on deviant behavior. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 44(5), 1239–1245. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2008.04.001Google Scholar
Mullen, E., & Skitka, L. J. (2006). Exploring the psychological underpinnings of the moral mandate effect: Motivated reasoning, identification, or affect? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90(4), 629–643. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2008.04.001CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nucci, L. P., & Turiel, E. (1978). Social interactions and the development of social concepts in preschool children. Child Development, 90(2), 400–407. https://doi.org/10.2307/1128704Google Scholar
Obergefell v. Hodges, 576 U.S. (2015). https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/14pdf/14-556_3204.pdfGoogle Scholar
Reifen Tagar, M., Morgan, G. S., Halperin, E., & Skitka, L. J. (2014). When ideology matters: Moral conviction and the association between ideology and policy preferences in the Israeli–Palestinian conflict. European Journal of Social Psychology, 44(2), 117–125. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.1993Google Scholar
Ryan, T. J. (2014). Reconsidering moral issues in politics. The Journal of Politics, 76(2), 380–397. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022381613001357Google Scholar
Ryan, T. J. (2017). No compromise: Political consequences of moralized attitudes. American Journal of Political Science, 61(2), 409–423. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajps.12248Google Scholar
Ryan, T. J. (2019). Actions versus consequences in political arguments: Insights from moral psychology. Journal of Politics, 81(2), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1086/701494CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sabucedo, J-M., Dono, M., Alzate, M., & Seoane, G. (2018). The importance of protesters’ morals: Moral obligation as a key variable to understand collective action. Frontiers in Psychology, 9, Article 418. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00418Google Scholar
Skitka, L. J. (2002). Do the means always justify the ends or do the ends sometimes justify the means? A value protection model of justice reasoning. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28(5), 588–597. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167202288003Google Scholar
Skitka, L. J., & Bauman, C. W. (2008). Moral conviction and political engagement. Political Psychology, 29(1), 29–54. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9221.2007.00611.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Skitka, L. J., Bauman, C. W., & Lytle, B. L. (2009). Limits on legitimacy: Moral and religious convictions as constraints on deference to authority. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 97(4), 567–578. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0015998Google Scholar
Skitka, L. J., Bauman, C. W., & Sargis, E. G. (2005). Moral conviction: Another contributor to attitude strength or something more? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 88(6), 895–917. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.88.6.895CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Skitka, L. J., Hanson, B. E., Morgan, G. S., & Wisneski, D. C. (2021). The psychology of moral conviction. Annual Review of Psychology, 72, 347–366. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-063020-030612Google Scholar
Skitka, L. J., Hanson, B. E., & Wisneski, D. C. (2017). Utopian hopes or dystopian fears? Understanding the motivational underpinnings of morally motivated political engagement. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 43(2), 177–190. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167216678858Google Scholar
Skitka, L. J., & Houston, D. (2001). When due process is of no consequence: Moral mandates and presumed defendant guilt or innocence. Social Justice Research, 14(3), 305–326. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1014372008257Google Scholar
Skitka, L. J., Liu, J., Yang, Y., Chen, H., Liu, L., & Xu, L. (2012). Exploring the cross-cultural generalizability and scope of morally motivated intolerance. Social Psychological and Personality and Science, 4(3), 324–331. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550612456404Google Scholar
Skitka, L. J., & Morgan, G. S. (2009). The double-edged sword of a moral state of mind. In Narvaez, D. & Lapsley, D. K. (Eds.), Personality, identity, and character: Explorations in moral psychology (pp. 355–375). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511627125.017CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Skitka, L. J., Morgan, G. S., & Wisneski, D. C. (2015). Political orientation and moral conviction: A conservative advantage or an equal opportunity motivator of political engagement? In Forgas, J., Fiedler, K., & Crano, W. (Eds.), Sydney symposium of social psychology: Vol. 17. Social psychology and politics (pp. 57–74). Psychology Press.Google Scholar
Skitka, L. J., & Mullen, E. (2002). Understanding judgments of fairness in a real-world political context: A test of the value protection model of justice reasoning. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28(10), 1419–1429. https://doi.org/10.1177/014616702236873CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Skitka, L. J., & Wisneski, D. C. (2011). Moral conviction and emotion. Emotion Review, 3(3), 328–330. https://doi.org/10.1177/1754073911402374Google Scholar
Täuber, S., van Zomeren, M., & Kutlaca, M. (2015). Should the moral core of climate issues be emphasized or downplayed in public discourse? Three ways to successfully manage the double-edged sword of moral communication. Climatic Change, 130(3), 453–464. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-014-1200-6Google Scholar
van Zomeren, M., Postmes, T., & Spears, R. (2012). On conviction’s collective consequences: Integrating moral conviction with the social identity model of collective action. British Journal of Social Psychology, 51(1), 52–71. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8309.2010.02000.xGoogle Scholar
Wisneski, D. C., Lytle, B. L., & Skitka, L. J. (2009). Gut reactions: Moral conviction, religiosity, and trust in authority. Psychological Science, 20(9), 1059–1063. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2009.02406.xCrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wright, J. C. (2012). Children’s and adolescent’s tolerance for divergent beliefs: Exploring the cognitive and affective dimensions of moral conviction in our youth. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 30(4), 493–510. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-835X.2011.02058.xCrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wright, J. C., Cullum, J., & Schwab, N. (2008). The cognitive and affective dimensions of moral conviction: Implications for attitudinal and behavioral measures of interpersonal tolerance. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 34(11), 1461–1476. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167208322557Google Scholar
Zaal, M. P., Laar, C. V., Ståhl, T., Ellemers, N., & Derks, B. (2011). By any means necessary: The effects of regulatory focus and moral conviction on hostile and benevolent forms of collective action. British Journal of Social Psychology, 50(4), 670–689. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8309.2011.02069.xCrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Zaal, M. P., Saab, R., O’Brien, K., Jeffries, C., Barreto, M., & van Laar, C. (2017). You’re either with us or against us! Moral conviction determines how politicized distinguish friend from foe. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 20(4), 519–539. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430215615682Google Scholar