Moral vitalism refers to a tendency to view good and evil as actual forces that can influence people and events. We introduce a scale designed to assess the belief in moral vitalism. High scorers on the scale endorse items such as “There are underlying forces of good and evil in this world.” After establishing the reliability and criterion validity of the scale (Studies 1, 2a, and 2b), we examined the predictive validity of the moral vitalism scale, showing that “moral vitalists” worry about being possessed by evil (Study 3), being contaminated through contact with evil people (Study 4), and forfeiting their own mental purity (Study 5). We discuss the nature of moral vitalism and the implications of the construct for understanding the role of metaphysical lay theories about the nature of good and evil in moral reasoning.
AltemeyerB.HunsbergerB. (2004). A revised religious fundamentalism scale: The short and sweet of it. International Journal for the Psychology of Religion, 14, 47-54.
2.
AtranS.MedinD.RossN.LynchE.VapnarksyV.EkE.. . .BaranM. (2002). Folkecology, cultural epidemiology, and the spirit of the commons: A garden experiment in the Maya lowlands, 1991-2001. Current Anthropology, 43, 421-450.
BarrettJ. L. (2000). Exploring the natural foundations of religion. Trends in Cognitive Science, 4, 29-34.
5.
BastianB.HaslamN. (2006). Psychological essentialism and stereotype endorsement. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 42, 228-235.
6.
BastianB.HaslamN. (2008). Psychological essentialism and social identification: Immigration from two perspectives. Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 11, 127-140.
7.
BaumeisterR. F.BratslavskyE.FinkenauerC.VohsK. D. (2001). Bad is stronger than good. Review of General Psychology, 5, 323-370.
8.
BechtelW.RichardsonR. C. (1998). Vitalism. In CraigE. (Ed.), Routledge encyclopedia of philosophy (pp. 639-643). London, England: Routledge
9.
BeringJ. M. (2002). Existential theory of mind. Review of General Psychology, 6, 3-24.
10.
BeringJ. M. (2006). The folk psychology of souls. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 29, 453-498.
11.
BoyerP. (2003). Religious thought and behavior as by-products of brain function. Trends in Cognitive Science, 7, 119-124.
12.
BoyerP. (2008). Being human: Religion: Bound to believe?Nature, 455, 1038-1039.
13.
BuhrmesterM. D.KwangT.GoslingS. D. (2011). Amazon’s Mechanical Turk: A new source of inexpensive, yet high-quality, data?Perspectives on Psychological Science, 6, 3-5.
14.
CacioppoJ. T.PettyR. E. (1984). The need for cognition: Relationship to attitudinal processes. In McGlynnR.MadduxJ.StoltenbergC.HarveyJ. (Eds.), Social perception in clinical and counseling psychology (pp. 113-139). Lubbock: Texas Tech Press.
15.
CashmoreA. R. (2010). The Lucretian Swerve: The biological basis of human behavior and the criminal justice system. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 107, 4499-4504.
16.
CohenA. B.MalkaA.RozinP.CherfasL. (2006). Religion and unforgivable offenses. Journal of Personality, 74, 85-118.
17.
CohenA. B.RozinP. (2001). Religion and the morality of mentality. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81, 697-710.
18.
CohenE. (2008). What is spirit possession? Defining, comparing, and explaining two possession forms. Ethnos, 73, 101-126.
19.
CohenE.BarrettJ. L. (2008). Conceptualizing spirit possession: Ethnographic and experimental evidence. Ethos, 36, 246-267.
20.
DouglasM. (1966). Purity and danger: An analysis of concepts of pollution and taboo. London, England: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
21.
EpleyN.AkalisS.WaytzA.CacioppoJ. T. (2008). Creating social connection through inferential reproduction: Loneliness and perceived agency in gadgets, gods, and greyhounds. Psychological Science, 19, 114-120.
22.
FrazerJ. G. (1959). The golden bough: A study in magic and religion (GasterT. H., Ed.). New York, NY: Macmillan. (Original work published 1890)
23.
FrederickS. (2005). Cognitive reflection and decision making. The Journal of Economic Perspectives, 19, 25-42.
GoodwinG. P.DarleyJ. M. (2008). The psychology of meta-ethics: Exploring objectivism. Cognition, 106, 1339-1366.
26.
GoodwinG. P.DarleyJ. M. (2012). Why are some moral beliefs seen as more objective than others?Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 48, 250-256.
27.
GrahamJ.HaidtJ.NosekB. (2009). Liberals and conservatives rely on different sets of moral foundations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96, 1029-1046.
28.
GrayK.WegnerD. M. (2010). Blaming God for our pain: Human suffering and the divine mind. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 14, 7-16.
29.
HaidtJ.AlgoeS. (2004). Moral amplification and the emotions that attach us to saints and demons. In GreenbergJ.KooleS. L.PyszczynskiT. (Eds.), Handbook of experimental existential psychology (pp. 322-335). New York, NY: Guilford.
30.
HaidtJ.McCauleyC.RozinP. (1994). Individual differences in sensitivity to disgust: A scale sampling seven domains of disgust elicitors. Personality and Individual Differences, 16, 701-713.
31.
HeiderF. (1958). The psychology of interpersonal relations. New York, NY: Wiley.
32.
HerbaJ. K.RachmanS. (2007). Vulnerability to mental contamination. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 45, 2804-2812.
33.
HodsonG.CostelloK. (2007). Interpersonal disgust, ideological orientations, and dehumanization as predictors of intergroup attitudes. Psychological Science, 18, 691-698.
34.
HogeD. R. (1972). A validated intrinsic religious motivation scale. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 11, 369-376.
35.
InagakiK.HatanoG. (2004). Vitalistic causality in young children’s naive biology. Trends in Cognitive Science, 8, 356-362.
36.
JarvisW. B. G.PettyR. E. (1996). The need to evaluate. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 172-194.
37.
JostJ. T.GlaserJ.KruglanskiA. W.SullowayF. J. (2003). Political conservatism as motivated social cognition. Psychological Bulletin, 129, 339-375.
38.
JungC. G. (1983). Excerpts from on the psychology of the unconscious: Two essays. In StorrA. (Ed.), The essential jung (pp. 68-71). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. (Original work published 1917).
39.
KellyG. A. (1955). The psychology of personal constructs. New York, NY: W.W. Norton.
40.
LindemanM.SaherM. (2007). Vitalism, purpose and superstition. British Journal of Psychology, 98, 33-44.
41.
MaussM. (1972). A general theory of magic (BrainR. Trans.). New York, NY: W.W. Norton. (Original work published 1902)
42.
MorewedgeC. K. (2009). Negative bias in attribution of external agency. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 4, 535-545.
43.
MorrisS. C.TaplinJ. E.GelmanS. A. (2000). Vitalism in naive biological thinking. Developmental Psychology, 36, 582-595.
44.
NemeroffC. J. (1995). Magical thinking about illness virulence: Conceptions of germs from “safe” versus “dangerous” others. Health Psychology, 14, 147-151.
45.
NemeroffC. J.RozinP. (1994). The contagion concept in adult thinking in the United States: Transmission of germs and of interpersonal influence. Ethos, 22, 158-186.
46.
NemeroffC. J.RozinP. (2000). The makings of the magical mind: The nature and function of sympathetic magical thinking. In RosengrenK. S.JohnsonC. N.HarrisP. L. (Eds.), Imagining the impossible: Magical, scientific, and religious thinking in children (pp. 1-34). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
47.
NeubergS. L.NewsomJ. T. (1993). Personal need for structure: Individual differences in the desire for simpler structure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65, 113-131.
48.
NoS.HongY. Y.LiaoH. Y.LeeK.WoodD.ChaoM. M. (2008). Lay theory of race affects and moderates Asian Americans’ responses toward American culture. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95(4), 991-1004.
49.
PaulhusD. L.HarmsP. D. (2004). Measuring cognitive ability with the over-claiming technique. Intelligence, 32, 297-314.
50.
PaulhusD. L.HarmsP. D.BruceM. N.LysyD. C. (2003). The over-claiming technique: Measuring bias independent of accuracy. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84, 681-693.
51.
PiagetJ. (1974). Understanding Causality (MilesD.MilesM., Trans.). New York, NY: W.W. Norton.
52.
RozinP.NemeroffC. (2002). Sympathetic magical thinking: The contagion and similarity “heuristics.” In GilovichT.GriffinD.KahnemanD. (Eds.), Heuristics and biases: The psychology of intuitive judgment (pp. 201-216). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
53.
RozinP.NemeroffC.HorowitzM.GordonB.VoetW. (1995). The borders of the self: Contamination sensitivity and potency of the body apertures and other body parts. Journal of Research in Personality, 29, 318-340.
54.
RozinP.NemeroffC. J. (1990). The laws of sympathetic magic: A psychological analysis of similarity and contagion. In StiglerJ. W.ShwederR. A.HerdtG. (Eds.), Cultural psychology: Essays on comparative human development (pp. 205-232). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
55.
RozinP.RoyzmanE. B. (2001). Negative bias, negative dominance, and contagion. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 5, 296-320.
56.
SkitkaL. J.BaumanC. W.SargisE. G. (2005). Moral conviction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 88, 895-917.
57.
StaubE. (1989). The roots of evil: The origins of genocide and other group violence. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
58.
StaubE. (2003). The psychology of good and evil: Why children, adults and groups help and harm others. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
59.
TetlockP. E.KristelO. V.ElsonB.GreenM. C.LernerJ. S. (2000). The psychology of the unthinkable: Taboo trade-offs, forbidden base rates, and heretical counterfactuals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78, 853-870.
60.
TylorE. B. (1974). Primitive culture: Researches into the development of mythology, philosophy, religion, art, and custom. New York, NY: Gordon Press. (Original work published 1871)
61.
WebsterR. J.SaucierD. A. (2013). Angels and demons are among us: Assessing individual differences in belief in pure evil and belief in pure good. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 39, 1455-1470.
62.
WegnerD. M. (1994). Ironic processes of mental control. Psychological Review, 101, 34-52.
63.
ZimbardoP. G. (2007). The Lucifer effect: Understanding how good people turn evil. New York, NY: Random House.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
