The Moralization of Effort

Celniker, Jared

doi:10.31234/osf.io/nh9ax

Cited by 9 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…3 After completing all dependent measures, participants completed the PWE scale (Mirels & Garrett, 1971) and demographic measures. The wordings for all the items used in our studies are available in the materials section on our OSF page (https://osf.io/zwqbe/; Celniker et al, 2020).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The moralization of effort.

Celniker¹,

Gregory²,

Koo³

et al. 2023

Journal of Experimental Psychology: General

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

People believe that effort is valuable, but what kind of value does it confer? We find that displays of effort signal moral character. Eight studies (N = 5,502) demonstrate the nature of these effects in the domains of paid employment, personal fitness, and charitable fundraising. The exertion of effort is deemed morally admirable (Studies 1-6) and is monetarily rewarded (Studies 2-6), even in situations where effort does not directly generate additional product, quality, or economic value. Convergent patterns of results emerged in South Korean and French cross-cultural replications (Studies 2b and 2c). We contend that the seeming irrationality of valuing effort for its own sake, such as in situations where one's efforts do not directly increase economic output (Studies 3-6), reveals a "deeply rational" social heuristic for evaluating potential cooperation partners. Specifically, effort cues engender broad moral trait ascriptions, and this moralization of effort influences donation behaviors (Study 5) and cooperative partner choice decision-making (Studies 4 and 6). In situating our account of effort moralization into past research and theorizing, we also consider the implications of these effects for social welfare policy and the future of work.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The moralization of effort.

Celniker¹,

Gregory²,

Koo³

et al. 2023

Journal of Experimental Psychology: General

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…7-8). Similarly, while excessive eating can amount to free-riding in collaborative interactions, puritanical values condemn gluttony even when it is harmless, and prescribe effortful selfdiscipline even when it doesn't benefit other people (Celniker et al, 2020;Hill, 2007;Tierney et al, 2021). In the same vein, strict regulations of music, dance, drinking or feasting, appear, to our modern eyes, as unnecessarily austere restrictions.…”

Section: The Puzzle Of Morality Without Cooperationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Moral disciplining: the cognitive and evolutionary foundations of puritanical morality

Fitouchi¹,

André²,

Baumard³

2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Why do many human societies condemn apparently harmless and pleasurable behaviors, such as lust, gluttony, drinking, drugs, gambling, or even music and dance? Why do they erect temperance, hedonic restraint, sobriety, decency and piety as cardinal moral virtues? While existing accounts consider this puritanical morality as an exception to the cooperative function of moral intuitions, we propose that it stems, like other moral concerns, from moral intuitions targeting cooperative challenges. Specifically, we argue that it emerges in response to a key feature of cooperation, namely that the latter is (ultimately) a long-term strategy, requiring (proximately) the self-control of appetites for immediate gratification. Puritanical moralizations condemn and praise behaviors which, although not intrinsically cooperative or uncooperative, are perceived as affecting people’s propensity to cooperate, by modifying their ability to resist short-term impulses conflicting with cooperative motivations. Drinking, drugs, unruly feasts, dances, and immodest clothing are condemned as stimulating people’s short-term impulses, thus facilitating uncooperative behaviors (e.g. adultery, violence, economic free-riding). Immoderate indulgence in harmless bodily pleasures (e.g. lust, masturbation, gluttony) is perceived as addictively reinforcing short-term impulses, thus making harder the self-control of future temptations to cheat. Moralizations of ascetic temperance, daily self-discipline, and pious ritual observance are perceived as nurturing the self-restraint consubstantial to a cooperative character, able to resist selfish temptations when the latter arise. We review psychological, historical, and ethnographic evidence supporting this account, and discuss its implications regarding the cross-cultural variations and cultural evolution of puritanical norms.

show abstract

“…In studies of American, French, and South Korean participants, Celniker and colleagues probed moral evaluations of a character who either exerts high or low effort under conditions where effort does not generate any additional benefit. Even when effort is "unproductive," people who exerted effort were seen as more morally admirable (Celniker et al, 2020).…”

Section: Moral Inference From Decisions About Effortmentioning

confidence: 99%

The relational logic of moral inference

Crockett

Everett

Gill

et al. 2021

Advances in Experimental Social Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

How do we make inferences about the moral character of others? Here we review recent work on the cognitive mechanisms of moral inference and impression updating. We show that moral inference follows basic principles of Bayesian inference, but also departs from the standard Bayesian model in ways that may facilitate the maintenance of social relationships. Moral inference is not only sensitive to whether people make moral decisions, but also to features of decisions that reveal their suitability as a relational partner. Together these findings suggest that moral inference follows a relational logic: people form and update moral impressions in ways that are responsive to the demands of ongoing social relationships and particular social roles. We discuss implications of these findings for theories of moral cognition and identify new directions for research on human morality and person perception.

show abstract

The Moralization of Effort

Cited by 9 publications

References 23 publications

The moralization of effort.

The moralization of effort.

Moral disciplining: the cognitive and evolutionary foundations of puritanical morality

The relational logic of moral inference

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About