Attitude Moralization Within Polarized Contexts: An Emotional Value-Protective Response to Dyadic Harm Cues

被引:18
作者
D'Amore, Chantal [1 ]
van Zomeren, Martijn [1 ]
Koudenburg, Namkje [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands
基金
荷兰研究理事会;
关键词
attitude moralization; polarization; dyadic harm; emotions; value protection; TABOO TRADE-OFFS; MORAL CONVICTION; PSYCHOLOGY; POWER; MODEL;
D O I
10.1177/01461672211047375
中图分类号
B84 [心理学];
学科分类号
04 ; 0402 ;
摘要
Polarization about societal issues involves attitudinal conflict, but we know little about how such conflict transforms into moral conflict. Integrating insights on polarization and psychological value protection, we propose a model that predicts when and how attitude moralization (i.e., when attitudes become grounded in core values) may be triggered and develops within polarized contexts. We tested this model in three experiments (total N = 823) in the context of the polarized Zwarte Piet (blackface) debate in the Netherlands. Specifically, we tested the hypotheses that (a) situational cues to dyadic harm in this context (i.e., an outgroup that is perceived as intentionally inflicting harm onto innocent victims) trigger individuals to moralize their relevant attitude, because of (b) emotional value-protective responses. Findings supported both hypotheses across different regional contexts, suggesting that attitude moralization can emerge within polarized contexts when people are exposed to actions by attitudinal opponents perceived as causing dyadic harm.
引用
收藏
页码:1566 / 1579
页数:14
相关论文
共 58 条
[11]   The Psychology of Morality: A Review and Analysis of Empirical Studies Published From 1940 Through 2017 [J].
Ellemers, Naomi ;
van der Toorn, Jojanneke ;
Paunov, Yavor ;
van Leeuwen, Thed .
PERSONALITY AND SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY REVIEW, 2019, 23 (04) :332-366
[12]   Morality in Groups: On the Social-Regulatory Functions of Right and Wrong [J].
Ellemers, Naomi ;
van den Bos, Kees .
SOCIAL AND PERSONALITY PSYCHOLOGY COMPASS, 2012, 6 (12) :878-889
[13]   Understanding the Process of Moralization: How Eating Meat Becomes a Moral Issue [J].
Feinberg, Matthew ;
Kovacheff, Chloe ;
Teper, Rimma ;
Inbar, Yoel .
JOURNAL OF PERSONALITY AND SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY, 2019, 117 (01) :50-72
[14]   Political sectarianism in America [J].
Finkel, Eli J. ;
Bail, Christopher A. ;
Cikara, Mina ;
Ditto, Peter H. ;
Iyengar, Shanto ;
Klar, Samara ;
Mason, Lilliana ;
McGrath, Mary C. ;
Nyhan, Brendan ;
Rand, David G. ;
Skitka, Linda J. ;
Tucker, Joshua A. ;
Van Bavel, Jay J. ;
Wang, Cynthia S. ;
Druckman, James N. .
SCIENCE, 2020, 370 (6516) :533-536
[15]   Taboo trade-offs: Reactions to transactions that transgress the spheres of justice [J].
Fiske, AP ;
Tetlock, PE .
POLITICAL PSYCHOLOGY, 1997, 18 (02) :255-297
[16]   The Moral Roots of Partisan Division: How Moral Conviction Heightens Affective Polarization [J].
Garrett, Kristin N. ;
Bankert, Alexa .
BRITISH JOURNAL OF POLITICAL SCIENCE, 2020, 50 (02) :621-640
[17]   The emotional dog and its rational tail: A social intuitionist approach to moral judgment [J].
Haidt, J .
PSYCHOLOGICAL REVIEW, 2001, 108 (04) :814-834
[18]  
Hayes A. F., 2012, PROCESS VERSATILE CO, DOI DOI 10.1111/JEDM.12050
[19]   AFFECT, NOT IDEOLOGY A SOCIAL IDENTITY PERSPECTIVE ON POLARIZATION [J].
Iyengar, Shanto ;
Sood, Gaurav ;
Lelkes, Yphtach .
PUBLIC OPINION QUARTERLY, 2012, 76 (03) :405-431
[20]  
Kohlberg L., 1969, Handbook of socialization theory and research, P347