Centripetal and centrifugal forces in the moral circle: Competing constraints on moral learning

Graham, Jesse; Waytz, Adam; Meindl, Peter; Iyer, Ravi; Young, Liane

doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2016.12.001

Cited by 55 publications

(73 citation statements)

References 52 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Indeed, the possibility that moral expansiveness is context dependent is consistent with some earlier examinations of the binary moral circle, with previous research finding individual decisions regarding moral inclusion to be somewhat dependent on variations in context [ 4 ] and cognition [ 5 , 6 ]. Recent theoretical work has considered the susceptibility of our perceptions of moral standing and responsibility to various pressures and competing motivations [ 2 , 22 – 24 ]. However, additional empirical work is required on this front to provide a clearer picture of the stability of moral expansiveness decision-making, and the extent to which perceptions of moral standing and obligation are indeed flexible and context dependent.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Moral expansiveness short form: Validity and reliability of the MESx

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Moral expansiveness refers to the range of entities (human and non-human) deemed worthy of moral concern and treatment. Previous research has established that the Moral Expansiveness Scale (MES) is a powerful predictor of altruistic moral decision-making and captures a unique dimension of moral cognition. However, the length of the full MES may be restrictive for some researchers. Here we establish the reliability and validity of a reduced moral expansiveness scale, the MESx. Consistent with the full version, the MESx is strongly associated with (but not reducible to) theoretically related constructs, such as endorsement of universalism values, identification with all humanity, and connectedness to nature. The MESx also predicted measures of altruistic moral decision-making to the same degree as the full MES. Further, the MESx passed tests of discriminant validity, was unrelated to political conservatism (unlike the full MES), only mildly associated with the tendency to provide socially desirable responses, and produced moderate reliability over time. We conclude that the MESx is a psychometrically valid alternative for researchers requiring a short measure of moral expansiveness.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Moral expansiveness short form: Validity and reliability of the MESx

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Beside the consequences of moral exclusion, scholars are also interested in the factors that lead people to exclude certain groups from their personal scope of moral regard. The antecedents include some psychological characteristics of the perceiver, like one's adopted mind-set (Laham, 2009), social values and attitudes (Crimston, Bain, Hornsey, & Bastian, 2016;Hadarics & Kende, 2019;Passini & Morselli, 2017;Waytz, Iyer, Young, & Graham, 2016), or empathy (Crimston et al, 2016;Graham, Waytz, Meindl, Iyer, & Young, 2017). Another line of research focuses on the characteristics of the target groups that makes their exclusion appropriate for the perpetrators.…”

Section: Outgroup Characteristics and Moral Exclusionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Perceived outgroup characteristics as antecedents and consequences of moral exclusion

Hadarics

2020

The Social Science Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The literature of group-based moral exclusion emphasizes that the two main reasons for excluding certain groups from the boundaries of moral regard are perceived threat and social distance. Nonetheless, we cannot rule out the possibility that these two variables are not just antecedents but also posterior justifications for moral exclusion. To reveal this possibility, applying a two-wave cross-lagged panel design, we tested the temporal directions of the relationships between group-based moral exclusion on the one hand, and perceived intergroup threat and social distance on the other. Our assumptions were tested in the case of the beliefs about two target groups within Hungary, Muslim immigrants and Roma people. Beliefs about Roma people showed that while perceived outgroup characteristics did not significantly predict moral exclusion over time, the latter showed a significant longitudinal relationship with both perceived outgroup characteristics. Both group characteristics predicted moral exclusion longitudinally in the case of Muslim immigrants, while the latter predicted only perceived threat. These results imply that outgroup characteristics, like perceived intergroup threat and social distance, do not always function as mere antecedents of moral exclusion, but are also potential post-hoc justifications for it.

show abstract

“…Different moral foundations, however, prescribe different pathways to feeling moral and developing moral reputations (Graham, Haidt, & Nosek, 2009). Whereas two centrifugal moral foundations-harm/ care and fairness/reciprocity-can potentially support positive intergroup interactions by expanding moral regard outward (to include distant others), two centripetal moral foundations-ingroup/loyalty and authority/respect-can promote intergroup conflict by justifying fighting for ingroup goals and institutions over appreciation and promotion of universal goals and institutions (Doosje, van den Bos, Loseman, Feddes, & Mann, 2012;Graham, Waytz, Meindl, Iyer, & Young, 2017).…”

Section: How Do Different Moral Motives Shape Individual Behavior In mentioning

confidence: 99%

Intergroup Conflict 2020

Halevy

Cohen

2019

Negotiation Conflict Man Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The pervasiveness, persistence, and petrifying scope of intergroup conflict have fueled substantial scholarly interest in intergroup conflict across the social and biological sciences. Here we outline five questions that we hope students of intergroup conflict will undertake to research in years to come: (a) When and why do people engage in, and publicly display, blatant forms of intergroup hostility? (b) How do different moral motives shape individual behavior in intergroup conflict? (c) How do intragroup processes influence intergroup processes and vice versa? (d) How does the changing nature of "groups" influence intergroup conflict and its resolution? And (e) how will global challenges shape intergroup relations in the 21st century? Although it is unimaginable that the problem of intergroup conflict will be eradicated, we hope that addressing these questions will help us understand how to manage intergroup conflicts and their harmful consequences better.

show abstract

Centripetal and centrifugal forces in the moral circle: Competing constraints on moral learning

Cited by 55 publications

References 52 publications

Moral expansiveness short form: Validity and reliability of the MESx

Moral expansiveness short form: Validity and reliability of the MESx

Perceived outgroup characteristics as antecedents and consequences of moral exclusion

Intergroup Conflict 2020

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About