Abstract:Immigration and refugee crisis are only one of the major problems many European countries are currently facing, including the transition countries, such as Serbia. Reactions to refugees and immigrants from the Middle East and North Africa are polarized and raise the issue of moral aspects of attitudes towards them. Lately, human (im)morality has often been investigated through the concepts of the Dark Tetrad traits and Moral Foundations. The aim of this research aim is to investigate the role of the Dark Tetra… Show more
“…The relationship between morality and attitudes towards immigration is supported by our findings in Study 1 and is in line with recent research on MFT in other cultural settings (Federico et al, 2016;Han & Dawson, 2021;Petrović, 2019;Stewart & Morris 2021).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 92%
“…Finally, testing a moral manipulation in the context of intergroup relations and focusing on a particular group of immigrants instead of immigration in general (i.e., Hadarics & Kende, 2017;Nath et al, 2022). The relationship between morality and attitudes toward immigration is supported by our findings in Study 1 and is in line with recent research on MFT in other cultural settings (Federico et al, 2016;Han & Dawson, 2022;Petrovic´, 2019;Stewart & Morris, 2021).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 88%
“…interpersonal intentions and intergroup relations (Brambilla et al, 2019;Leach et al, 2015;López-Rodríguez & Zagefka, 2015;Monroe & Plant, 2019;Ray et al, 2021). Polarized attitudes towards immigrants (i.e., solidarity, violence) may reflect different morally relevant motives, both on the individual and intergroup level (Kertzer et al, 2014;Nicol & Rounding, 2017;Petrović, 2019). Individualizing foundations are negatively associated with the perceived threat regarding immigration (Hadarics & Kende, 2017) and positively related to helping intentions towards outgroups in need (Nilsson et al, 2016;Obeid et al, 2017;Smith et al, 2014;Wilhelm et al, 2020), empathic concerns and perspective taking (Hannikainen et al, 2020), greater endorsement of human rights principles (Stolerman & Lagnado, 2020) and collective action intentions in equalityfocused movements (Milesi, 2017).…”
Section: Moral Foundations and Intergroup Relationsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Manipulation of moral arguments have been found to reinforce certain political attitudes (Feinberg & Willer, 2012) as well as as environmental attitudes and charitable giving (e.g., Feinberg & Willer, 2013, 2019Feygina et al, 2009;Winterich et al, 2012). Past research on moral foundations has mainly focused on differences between the political spectrum (i.e., liberals and conservatives in the US context).…”
Section: Moral Foundations As Motivated Reasoning For Attitudesmentioning
Previous research suggests that moral foundations have consequences for intergroup relations, but the evidence is mostly correlational and gathered mainly in north American countries. This work aimed to replicate the conceptual findings in the European context and test the effects of manipulating a moral framing on the perceived (im)morality of minority groups, willingness to defend their rights collectively and support for anti-immigration policies. A correlational study showed that binding and individualizing foundations contributed to predict support for anti-immigration policies and willingness to participate in collective actions for immigrants’ rights. A follow-up experiment suggested that emphasizing the benefits for society of fairness—an individualizing foundation—(vs. authority—a binding foundation) may improve intergroup evaluations, increase collective action intentions, and reduce support for anti-immigration policies. Although a second preregistered experiment could not replicate the results, complementary analyses suggested some positive effects of fairness compared with the control and authority conditions. These results open a path to investigate whether a fairness moral reasoning might improve attitudes toward immigrants.
“…The relationship between morality and attitudes towards immigration is supported by our findings in Study 1 and is in line with recent research on MFT in other cultural settings (Federico et al, 2016;Han & Dawson, 2021;Petrović, 2019;Stewart & Morris 2021).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 92%
“…Finally, testing a moral manipulation in the context of intergroup relations and focusing on a particular group of immigrants instead of immigration in general (i.e., Hadarics & Kende, 2017;Nath et al, 2022). The relationship between morality and attitudes toward immigration is supported by our findings in Study 1 and is in line with recent research on MFT in other cultural settings (Federico et al, 2016;Han & Dawson, 2022;Petrovic´, 2019;Stewart & Morris, 2021).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 88%
“…interpersonal intentions and intergroup relations (Brambilla et al, 2019;Leach et al, 2015;López-Rodríguez & Zagefka, 2015;Monroe & Plant, 2019;Ray et al, 2021). Polarized attitudes towards immigrants (i.e., solidarity, violence) may reflect different morally relevant motives, both on the individual and intergroup level (Kertzer et al, 2014;Nicol & Rounding, 2017;Petrović, 2019). Individualizing foundations are negatively associated with the perceived threat regarding immigration (Hadarics & Kende, 2017) and positively related to helping intentions towards outgroups in need (Nilsson et al, 2016;Obeid et al, 2017;Smith et al, 2014;Wilhelm et al, 2020), empathic concerns and perspective taking (Hannikainen et al, 2020), greater endorsement of human rights principles (Stolerman & Lagnado, 2020) and collective action intentions in equalityfocused movements (Milesi, 2017).…”
Section: Moral Foundations and Intergroup Relationsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Manipulation of moral arguments have been found to reinforce certain political attitudes (Feinberg & Willer, 2012) as well as as environmental attitudes and charitable giving (e.g., Feinberg & Willer, 2013, 2019Feygina et al, 2009;Winterich et al, 2012). Past research on moral foundations has mainly focused on differences between the political spectrum (i.e., liberals and conservatives in the US context).…”
Section: Moral Foundations As Motivated Reasoning For Attitudesmentioning
Previous research suggests that moral foundations have consequences for intergroup relations, but the evidence is mostly correlational and gathered mainly in north American countries. This work aimed to replicate the conceptual findings in the European context and test the effects of manipulating a moral framing on the perceived (im)morality of minority groups, willingness to defend their rights collectively and support for anti-immigration policies. A correlational study showed that binding and individualizing foundations contributed to predict support for anti-immigration policies and willingness to participate in collective actions for immigrants’ rights. A follow-up experiment suggested that emphasizing the benefits for society of fairness—an individualizing foundation—(vs. authority—a binding foundation) may improve intergroup evaluations, increase collective action intentions, and reduce support for anti-immigration policies. Although a second preregistered experiment could not replicate the results, complementary analyses suggested some positive effects of fairness compared with the control and authority conditions. These results open a path to investigate whether a fairness moral reasoning might improve attitudes toward immigrants.
We examine the intricate relationship between media usage, personality traits, and perceived threat towards refugees. Using a diverse sample from six European countries (N = 9,085), we explore the moderating impact of Dark Triad traits on television news consumption. Our findings align with prior studies, indicating that public television news consumption is associated with lower perceived threat, while commercial news consumption shows the opposite pattern. These results likely stem from the divergent framing of migration in the media: public outlets emphasize compassion and integration, while commercial outlets lean towards sensationalism and fear-inducing narratives. Additionally, our study uncovers intriguing insights into the Dark Triad traits. While psychopathy is linked to heightened perceived threat, Machiavellianism and narcissism exhibit a negative association. Surprisingly, the positive relationship between commercial news consumption and perceived threat weakens among individuals high in Machiavellianism. These individuals, driven by self-interest and strategic thinking, may view refugees as potential resources rather than threats. Notably, we find no moderation effect of Dark Triad traits on public service news consumption. This suggests that sensationalized content resonates more with individuals high in these traits, while public service news, focusing on diverse perspectives, has a weaker impact on threat perceptions.
People with antagonistic personality traits are reportedly more racist, sexist, and xenophobic than their non-antagonistic counterparts. In the present studies (N1 = 718; N2 = 267), we examined whether people with antagonistic personality traits are also more likely to hold homophobic and transphobic attitudes, and, if they are, whether this can be explained by their moral intuitions. We found that people high in Machiavellianism, narcissism, and psychopathy are more likely to endorse homophobic and transphobic views. The associations of Machiavellianism and psychopathy with homophobia and transphobia were primarily explained by low endorsement of individualizing moral foundations (i.e., care and fairness), while the association of narcissism with these beliefs was primarily explained by high endorsement of the binding moral foundations (i.e., loyalty, authority, and sanctity). These findings provide insight into the types of people who harbour homophobic and transphobic attitudes and how differences in moral dispositions contribute to their LGBTQ+ prejudice.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.