Do moral values change with the seasons?

Moral values guide consequential attitudes and actions. Here, we report evidence of seasonal variation in Americans' endorsement of some-but not all-moral values. Studies 1 and 2 examined a decade of data from the United States (total N = 232,975) and produced consistent evidence of a biannual seasonal cycle in values pertaining to loyalty, authority, and purity ("binding" moral values)-with strongest endorsement in spring and autumn and weakest endorsement in summer and winter-but not in values pertaining to care and fairness ("individualizing" moral values). Study 2 also provided some evidence that the summer decrease, but not the winter decrease, in binding moral value endorsement was stronger in regions with greater seasonal extremity. Analyses on an additional year of US data (study 3; n = 24,199) provided further replication and showed that this biannual seasonal cycle cannot be easily dismissed as a sampling artifact. Study 4 provided a partial explanation for the biannual seasonal cycle in Americans' endorsement of binding moral values by showing that it was predicted by an analogous seasonal cycle in Americans' experience of anxiety. Study 5 tested the generalizability of the primary findings and found similar seasonal cycles in endorsement of binding moral values in Canada and Australia (but not in the United Kingdom). Collectively, results from these five studies provide evidence that moral values change with the seasons, with intriguing implications for additional outcomes that can be affected by those values (e.g., intergroup prejudices, political attitudes, legal judgments).

Rape or Homicide: Which Is Worse?

Some people believe rape is just as serious as homicide, or more serious, contrary to law. We examined the prevalence of this belief and whether it reflects an individual's political ideology and moral foundations. Analyses were based on a national YouGov survey of 1,125 US adults gathered in 2021. We found that only 26% of respondents believed rape was less serious than homicide. Most (61%) believed rape and homicide were equally serious, while 13% believed rape was more serious. Social progressives (particularly progressive women) were more likely than social conservatives to view rape as more serious or just as serious as homicide. However, this tendency was partially offset by the tendency of social progressives to view harm as a key factor in judging the morality of a behavior. We suggest that social progressives view rape more seriously than social conservatives because of their concern for gender inequality, but this concern is partially offset by their concern with harm.

Meat and morality: The moral foundation of purity, but not harm, predicts attitudes toward cultured meat.

Cultured meat (also referred to as cultivated, cell-based, or cell-cultured meat) is a novel food technology that is presented as a method of meat production without reliance on large-scale industrial farming. The pro-cultured meat narrative rests, in part, on a moral foundation: cultured meat is purported to alleviate the environmental and animal welfare harms associated with farmed meat. Despite this narrative, no research has examined which moral values underpin attitudes towards cultured meat. To examine this, we surveyed 1861 participants from the United States and Germany about their moral foundations and their attitudes towards cultured meat. In line with predictions, people who more strongly endorse moral values about purity (i.e., had higher scores on the purity subscale of the moral foundations scale) held more negative attitudes towards cultured meat. However, this relationship was much more consistent among participants from the United States than participants from Germany. Against predictions, attitudes towards cultured meat were not reliably associated with the extent to which people focus on harm as a moral foundation. The latter finding was particularly surprising in light of harm-reduction narratives around cultured meat. These findings demonstrate the need for a more nuanced discussion about, and understanding of, consumer concerns around cultured meat and the values that underpin them.

Moral foundations, moral emotions, and moral distress in NICU nurses.

Background: Moral distress is common in neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) nurses. Purpose: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the relationships between NICU nurses' moral foundations, moral emotions, and moral distress. Research design and method: This is an observational cross-sectional self-report questionnaire study. Participants and research context: One hundred and forty-two (24%) of 585 Level 3-4 NICU nurses completed pen-and-paper self-report measures of moral foundations (harm, fairness, ingroup, authority, and purity) (Moral Foundations Questionnaire-20), proneness to self-conscious moral emotions (guilt and shame) (modified Personal Feelings Questionnaire-2), and moral distress (futile care, compromised care, and untruthful care) (modified Revised Moral Distress Scale). Ethical considerations: Participation was voluntary and anonymous. The ethics committees of the participating hospitals approved the study protocol (HREC Reference: LNR/18/SCHN/316). Results: Non-parametric statistical analyses showed medium to large correlations between moral foundations and moral emotions. Moral foundations and moral emotions had trivial to small correlations with moral distress. Using a liberal p-value of <.10 for statistical significance because of the small sample size, harm (rs = 0.22) and fairness (rs = 0.16) predicted futile care, ingroup predicted compromised care (rs = 0.19) and untruthful care (rs = 0.15), and purity predicted untruthful care (rs = 0.15). Guilt-proneness predicted futile care (rs = 0.15). Shame-proneness did not predict moral distress. Conclusion: The correlations between moral foundations and moral emotions were significant. Moral foundations and guilt-proneness predicted one or more dimensions of moral distress. The smaller than expected effect sizes may have been owing to how moral foundations, moral emotions, and moral distress were conceptualized and measured, or to moral disengagement, including NICU nurses' possible reluctance to countenance aversive but morally warranted feelings of guilt and especially shame. Understanding the nature of these relationships may complement the efforts of NICU administrators, educators, counsellors, and nurses themselves to mitigate moral distress.

Examining the role of moral foundations in promoting intergroup contact willingness.

Improving people's motivation to seek meaningful intergroup contact is considered key to facilitating intergroup harmony. Based on moral foundations theory, this study examines how moral foundations as individual traits predict contact willingness with three minority groups (foreign domestic helpers, LGBT, and Chinese expats) and how moral emotions mediate such associations. We tested our hypotheses based on survey data across Hong Kong and Singapore. We found that care/harm foundation positively predicted contact willingness with foreign domestic helpers and LGBT people, mediated by compassion. Sanctity/degradation foundation negatively predicted contact willingness with LGBT people only in Singapore. Loyalty/betrayal foundation served as a positive predictor of willingness to contact Chinese expats. We also found care/harm foundation to be exclusively associated with compassion and promoted willingness to contact with helpers and LGBT people. Our findings highlight the influence of moral foundations, and possibly norms and intergroup dynamics at the societal level in predicting willingness to contact outgroups.

Scaling up the discovery of hesitancy profiles by identifying the framing of beliefs towards vaccine confidence in Twitter discourse.

Our study focused on the discovery of how vaccine hesitancy is framed in Twitter discourse, allowing us to recognize at-scale all tweets that evoke any of the hesitancy framings as well as the stance of the tweet authors towards the frame. By categorizing the hesitancy framings that propagate misinformation, address issues of trust in vaccines, or highlight moral issues or civil rights, we were able to empirically recognize their ontological commitments. Ontological commitments of vaccine hesitancy framings couples with the stance of tweet authors allowed us to identify hesitancy profiles for two most controversial yet effective and underutilized vaccines for which there remains substantial reluctance among the public: the Human Papillomavirus and the COVID-19 vaccines. The discovered hesitancy profiles inform public health messaging approaches to effectively reach Twitter users with promise to shift or bolster vaccine attitudes.

Factors influencing acceptability of final disposal of incinerated ash and decontaminated soil from TEPCO's Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant accident.

TEPCO's Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant accident prompted extensive decontamination work. The decontaminated soil and incinerated ash generated by the process are scheduled for final disposal by March 2045 outside Fukushima Prefecture. The final disposal is unprecedented worldwide. Clarifying their acceptability will contribute to the final disposal of decontaminated soil and incinerated ash, as well as add knowledge about the perceived risk of low-concentration radioactive waste. A questionnaire survey was conducted to assess the psychological factors influencing final disposal acceptability. The results of the structural equation modeling demonstrated stable results, with risk perception decreasing acceptability, social benefits increasing acceptability, and personal benefits having limited impact. The initiative for the final disposal of decontaminated soil and incinerated ash can facilitate the reconstruction of Fukushima Prefecture after the disaster. Trust and intergenerational expectations are critical factors influencing the acceptability of this disposal. The responses were classified based on the relevance of moral norms using cluster analysis and moral foundations. The influence of each element on acceptability varied depending on the cluster. Trust was identified as the most influential factor in acceptability, regardless of the level of importance placed on moral norms.

Measuring morality: Analyzing the factor structure of the moral foundations questionnaire in veterans.

OBJECTIVES: Moral reasoning is an underexamined and potentially useful area of research relative to the care of moral injury in veterans. However, the most widely used measure of moral reasoning, the moral foundations questionnaire (MFQ), has not been validated in this population. METHODS: Post-9/11 veterans (N = 311) completed questionnaires which included the MFQ. Veterans' scores were compared to the general US population. Confirmatory factor analysis was used to test existing models of the MFQ in the sample. Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) was also used to examine potentially improved model fits. RESULTS: The two leading, preexisting MFQ models were both poor fits for the data. EFA results produced a four-factor model for the veteran sample using 25 of the original 30 items of the MFQ. CONCLUSIONS: Measuring moral reasoning among veterans may be important in understanding the experience of moral injury. However, the most widely used scale (MFQ) performs poorly among a sample of post-9/11 veterans, indicating that veterans may respond differently to the measure than the general US population. Military culture may uniquely influence veterans' moral reasoning, suggesting the need for military specific measures for this construct.

Do moral intuitions influence judges' sentencing decisions? A multilevel study of criminal court sentencing in Pennsylvania.

The influence of judges' personal moral values on their sentencing decisions is of longstanding interest to researchers and the public. Few studies, however, have examined this influence empirically. Using a unique data set that combines a survey of 81 criminal court judges with archival data on their 40,385 criminal sentences over a 2-year period, and drawing on Moral Foundations Theory, we hypothesize that judges with strong care and fairness intuitions will sentence defendants less severely while judges with strong loyalty, authority, and sanctity intuitions will sentence defendants more severely. We further hypothesize that these effects will be heightened when the defendant is from a racial minority group. Results show that sentencing outcomes are largely independent of judges' moral intuitions, except that fairness intuitions tend to increase leniency, especially when the defendant is Black, and sanctity intuitions tend to decrease leniency. Implications for future research on sentencing are discussed.

For whom is patriotism blind? Examining the roles of moral intuitions and system justification.

Patriotism defines one's attachment and identification to a broad political community. We examine how levels of patriotism are shaped by beliefs about the fairness of institutions, termed system justification, and people's moral intuitions. Using data from a 2021 YouGov survey, we find that system justification and "binding" moral intuitions that prioritize the cohesion of social groups both lead to greater patriotism. Notably, we found a moderating effect of moral intuitions on system justification. Strong binding intuitions reduced the effect of system justification, indicative of blind patriotism, where some people are patriotic even if they perceive the system as unfair. Strong "individualizing" intuitions, which prioritize fairness and protection from harm, increased the effect of system justification. This is consistent with the notion of constructive patriotism, where patriotism among people with strong individualizing intuitions is affected by whether they believe the country is living up to its fairness ideals. We extend prior research on patriotism and system justification by showing the vitally important way that moral intuitions moderate the effects of system justification.

The sanctity of life: The role of purity in attitudes towards abortion and euthanasia.

Although abortion and euthanasia are highly contested issues at the heart of the culture war, the moral foundations underlying ideological differences on these issues are mostly unknown. Given that much of the extant debate is framed around the sanctity of life, we argued that the moral foundation of purity/sanctity-a core moral belief that emphasises adherence to the "natural order"-would mediate the negative relationship between conservatism and support for abortion and euthanasia. As hypothesised, results from a nation-wide random sample of adults in New Zealand (N = 3360) revealed that purity/sanctity mediated the relationship between conservatism and opposition to both policies. These results demonstrate that, rather than being motivated by a desire to reduce harm, conservative opposition to pro-choice and end-of-life decisions is (partly) based on the view that ending a life, even if it is one's own, violates God's natural design and, thus, stains one's spiritual purity.

Moral foundations of pro-choice and pro-life women.

Opinions on abortion are more polarized than opinions on most other moral issues. Why are some people pro-choice and some pro-life? Religious and political preferences play a role here, but pro-choice and pro-life people may also differ in other aspects. In the current preregistered study (N = 479), we investigated how pro-choice women differ in their moral foundations from pro-life women. When the Moral Foundations Questionnaire (MFQ) was applied (i.e., when declared moral principles were measured), pro-life women scored higher than pro-choice women in loyalty, authority, and purity. However, when women were asked about moral judgments indirectly via more real-life problems from the Moral Foundations Vignettes (MFV), pro-choice women scored higher than pro-life women in emotional and physical care and liberty but lower in loyalty. When we additionally controlled for religious practice and political views, we found no differences between groups in declaring moral foundations (MFQ). However, in the case of real-life moral judgments (MFV), we observed higher care, fairness, and liberty among pro-choice and higher authority and purity among pro-life. Our results show intriguing nuances between women pro-choice and pro-life as we found a different pattern of moral foundations in those groups depending on whether we measured their declared abstract moral principles or moral judgment about real-life situations. We also showed how religious practice and political views might play a role in such differences. We conclude that attitudes to abortion "go beyond" abstract moral principles, and the real-life context matters in moral judgments. Supplementary information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s12144-023-04800-0.

Deciding between moral priorities and COVID-19 avoiding behaviors: A moral foundations vignette study.

Novel moral norms peculiar to the COVID-19 pandemic have resulted in tension between maintaining one's preexisting moral priorities (e.g., loyalty to one's family and human freedoms) and avoiding contraction of the COVID-19 disease and SARS COVID-2 virus. By drawing on moral foundations theory, the current study questioned how the COVID-19 pandemic (or health threat salience in general) affects moral decision making. With two consecutive pilot tests on three different samples (ns ≈ 40), we prepared our own sets of moral foundation vignettes which were contextualized on three levels of health threats: the COVID-19 threat, the non-COVID-19 health threat, and no threat. We compared the wrongness ratings of those transgressions in the main study (N = 396, M age = 22.47). The results showed that the acceptability of violations increased as the disease threat contextually increased, and the fairness, care, and purity foundations emerged as the most relevant moral concerns in the face of the disease threat. Additionally, participants' general binding moral foundation scores consistently predicted their evaluations of binding morality vignettes independent of the degree of the health threat. However, as the disease threat increased in the scenarios, pre-existing individuating morality scores lost their predictive power for care violations but not for fairness violations. The current findings imply the importance of contextual factors in moral decision making. Accordingly, we conclude that people make implicit cost-benefit analysis in arriving at a moral decision in health threatening contexts. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s12144-021-01941-y.

Do left-wingers discriminate? A cross-country study on the links between political orientation, values, moral foundations, and the Covid-19 passport.

To increase Covid-19 vaccine uptake and protect vulnerable people, many countries have introduced a Covid-19 passport in 2021, allowing vaccinated individuals to access indoor facilities more freely and travel to foreign countries. However, the passport has had unintended consequences as it discriminates against those who do not want to get vaccinated for medical, religious, or political reasons, or those who do not have access to vaccines. The present study (N = 678) assessed across Brazil, UK, USA, and a group of other countries, the links between political orientation, human values, and moral foundations, and attitudes towards the Covid-19 passport and whether people perceive it as a discriminatory measure. Results showed that left-wingers, typically more inclined to recognize discrimination, favor the passport more and perceive it as less discriminatory than right-wingers. This pattern remains consistent even after controlling for human values and moral foundations, independently predicting attitudes towards the passport. Overall, our findings provide novel insights into a context in which left-wingers support measures that involuntarily discriminate against certain groups. Supplementary information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s12144-023-04554-9.

How are moral foundations associated with empathic traits and moral identity?

We examined the relationship between moral foundations, empathic traits, and moral identity using an online survey via Mechanical Turk. In order to determine how moral foundations contribute to empathic traits and moral identity, we performed classical correlation analysis as well as Bayesian correlation analysis, Bayesian ANCOVA, and Bayesian regression analysis. Results showed that individualizing foundations (harm/care, fairness/reciprocity) and binding foundations (ingroup/loyalty, authority/respect, purity/sanctity) had various different relationships with empathic traits. In addition, the individualizing versus binding foundations showed somewhat reverse relationships with internalization and symbolization of moral identity. This suggests that moral foundations can contribute to further understanding of empathic traits and moral identity and how they relate to moral behavior in reality. We discuss the implications of these results for moral educators when starting to teach students about moral issues. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s12144-021-02372-5.

Genetic and Environmental Influences on Biological Essentialism, Heuristic Thinking, Need for Closure, and Conservative Values: Insights From a Survey and Twin Study.

Biological essentialism, the belief that human attributes are determined by biology, is a core component of essentialist thinking. Previous studies have shown that individual differences in essentialist thinking are associated with heuristic thinking, cognitive ability and style, conservative values, and prejudice. None, however, have examined whether biological essentialism is itself heritable, or the extent to which familial aggregation explains associations with core correlates. In order to do this, we analyzed data from a genetically informative sample of families with twins in Australia (N = 2,103), as well as general population samples from the UK (N = 501) and the US (N = 500). Genetic factors had little influence in individual differences in biological essentialism or in its relationship with heuristic thinking. Conservative values were genetically correlated with cognitive styles (i.e., need for closure and heuristic thinking). These findings support a bigger role of genes in explaining the relationship between cognitive processes and moral reasoning and ideology than they do the association between cognitive processes and essentialist thinking.

Not so conservative: Suppression effects between social and economic ideology on moral foundations and moral absolutism.

Recent research outcomes suggest that social and economic conservatism show divergent associations with external criteria. In this article, we present a quantitative study with 534 Colombian participants. We found that, although positively correlated, these two dimensions of conservative ideology also exhibit suppression effects and differentiated psychological profiles regarding moral foundations and moral absolutism. Specifically, controlling for economic conservatism increased the positive association between social conservatism and the binding moral foundations and moral absolutism, while controlling for social conservatism changed the signs of the initial positive associations between economic conservatism and these variables. Our results suggest the need to use independent measures for each dimension of ideology and test for suppression when evaluating their respective interaction with other psychological constructs.

Decision making processes underlying avoidance of mandatory child vaccination in Croatia - a qualitative study.

Despite extensive research evidencing child vaccination is safe and effective, we are witnessing a trend of increasing vaccine hesitancy which is listed among the top ten global health threats. Although some countries incorporate mandatory vaccination programs, no particularly efficient strategies for addressing vaccine avoidance have so far been identified. Within this study we investigated perceptions and reasoning of vaccine hesitant parents from Croatia where child vaccination is mandatory. The aims were to reveal different strategies by which they avoid mandatory vaccination schedules and hypothetical situations in which they would reconsider vaccinating, as well as to identify features of related decision-making. We conducted 25 semi-structured interviews with vaccine hesitant parents and analyzed the data using the framework of thematic analyses. The identified themes were related to the parents' decision-making process, reflection as well as justification of their decision, avoidance behavior of mandatory vaccination schedules and related consequences, dealing with outcomes of the decision and reconsidering vaccinating. The results support and extend previous findings regarding vaccine reasoning, linking hesitancy with the experientially intuitive thinking style and social intuitionist model of moral reasoning. The findings provide important insights into vaccination avoidance and potential for reconsideration, as well as dealing with related risks. Furthermore, we offer a general framework as well as practical guidelines that may help the development of strategies aimed at increasing vaccination rates.

How pills undermine skills: Moralization of cognitive enhancement and causal selection.

Despite the promise to boost human potential and wellbeing, enhancement drugs face recurring ethical scrutiny. The present studies examined attitudes toward cognitive enhancement in order to learn more about these ethical concerns, who has them, and the circumstances in which they arise. Fairness-based concerns underlay opposition to competitive use-even though enhancement drugs were described as legal, accessible and affordable. Moral values also influenced how subsequent rewards were causally explained: Opposition to competitive use reduced the causal contribution of the enhanced winner's skill, particularly among fairness-minded individuals. In a follow-up study, we asked: Would the normalization of enhancement practices alleviate concerns about their unfairness? Indeed, proliferation of competitive cognitive enhancement eradicated fairness-based concerns, and boosted the perceived causal role of the winner's skill. In contrast, purity-based concerns emerged in both recreational and competitive contexts, and were not assuaged by normalization.

Contact, moral foundations or knowledge? What predicts attitudes towards women who undergo IVF.

BACKGROUND: The willingness to try in vitro fertilization (IVF) as an infertility treatment, as well as its psychosocial consequences for couples, may be influenced by how they perceive the attitudes of general public towards this procedure. The focus of the current study was to identify predictors of attitudes towards mothers who underwent IVF to conceive a child. Three predictors were derived from attitude components: contact with someone who had undergone IVF (behavior), moral foundations (emotions), and the level of knowledge (cognition) about IVF. METHOD: In total, 817 participants (118 male and 692 female, 7 unreported) from Poland took part in the study. Participants were asked whether they knew a person who underwent IVF, completed a Moral Foundation Questionnaire, and answered a pre-piloted IVF knowledge test. Attitudes towards women who utilised IVF were measured with a modified Bogardus Social Distance Scale. Data were analysed using hierarchical and logistic regression analyses. RESULTS: The results showed that there was a weak link between previous contact with a person who underwent IVF and a positive attitude toward a woman who underwent IVF. The attitudes was also predicted by moral foundations: positively by care/harm and fairness/cheating foundations, and negatively by sanctity/degradation. Importantly, more knowledge about IVF was linked with a more positive attitude towards IVF, and this effect explained additional variance over and above moral foundations. CONCLUSIONS: Our study implies the need of psychoeducation to prevent stigmatization of individuals who try IVF due to infertility.