Right-Wing Authoritarianism and Social Dominance Orientation Predict Different Moral Signatures |
| |
Authors: | Petar Milojev Danny Osborne Lara M. Greaves Joseph Bulbulia Marc S. Wilson Caitlin L. Davies James H. Liu Chris G. Sibley |
| |
Affiliation: | 1. School of Psychology, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand 2. Victoria University of Wellington, Wellington, New Zealand
|
| |
Abstract: | Moral Foundations Theory posits five distinct foundations of morality: Harm/Care, Fairness/Reciprocity, In-group/Loyalty, Authority/Respect, and Purity/Sanctity. In combination, this should yield between four-to-six moral signatures—distinct combinations or patterns of support for these aspects of morality. We extend previous research by examining the replicability of these moral signatures in a New Zealand-based national sample (n = 3,635). Latent Profile Analysis identified four distinct moral signatures: Individuators, Moderates, Neutrals, and High Moralists. We integrate these moral signatures within the Dual Process Model (DPM) framework and show that Social Dominance Orientation predicts membership in the Neutral moral signature (moderate/lukewarm support for multiple moral foundations); whereas Right-Wing Authoritarianism predicts membership in the High Moralist signature (undifferentiated high support across moral foundations). These findings were observed controlling for Big-Six personality and various demographics. Thus, the authoritarian and dominance-based motives identified by the DPM independently predict categorical differences in the signatures people use to judge morality. |
| |
Keywords: | |
本文献已被 SpringerLink 等数据库收录! |
|