Moral foundations theory proposes five domains of morality—harm, fairness, loyalty, purity, and authority. Endorsement of these moral domains is assessed by the Moral Foundations Questionnaire (MFQ), a 30-item scale that has undergone intense measurement scrutiny. Across five samples (N = 464,229), we show greatly improved model fit using a Bifactor model that accounts for two kinds of items in the MFQ: judgment and relevance. We add to this space by demonstrating how using this improved measurement structure changes the strength of correlations of the moral foundations with numerous attitudes, cognitive styles, and moral decision-making. Future research should continue to identify what, if anything, the relevance and judgment factors might substantively capture over and above the substantive domains of moral foundations. In the meantime, we recommend that researchers use the Bifactor model for its improved model structure, rather than dropping the relevant items as some have proposed.
AltemeyerB. (1998). The other “authoritarian personality.” In ZannaM. P. (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 30, pp. 47–92). Elsevier.
2.
AltemeyerB. (2002). Dogmatic behavior among students: Testing a new measure of dogmatism. The Journal of Social Psychology, 142(6), 713–721. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224540209603931
3.
AtariM.HaidtJ.GrahamJ.KolevaS.StevensS. T.DehghaniM. (2022). Morality beyond the WEIRD: How the nomological network of morality varies across cultures. PsyArXiv. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/q6c9r
4.
BentlerP. M. (1990). Comparative fit indexes in structural models. Psychological Bulletin, 107(2), 238–246.
5.
BentlerP. M. (1995). EQS 5. Multivariate Software.
6.
ChoiI.KooM.ChoiJ. A. (2007). Individual differences in analytic versus holistic thinking. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 33(5), 691–705.
7.
CliffordS.IyengarV.CabezaR.Sinnott-ArmstrongW. (2015). Moral foundations vignettes: A standardized stimulus database of scenarios based on moral foundations theory. Behavior Research Methods, 47(4), 1178–1198. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-014-0551-2
8.
CohenA. B.MazzaG. L.JohnsonK. A.EndersC. K.WarnerC. M.PasekM. H.CookJ. E. (2017). Theorizing and measuring religiosity across cultures. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 43(12), 1724–1736. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167217727732
9.
CranmerG. A.MartinM. M. (2015). An examination of aggression and adaption traits with moral foundation. Communication Research Reports, 32(4), 360–366. https://doi.org/10.1080/08824096.2015.1089848
10.
CurryO. S.Jones ChestersM.Van LissaC. J. (2019). Mapping morality with a compass: Testing the theory of “morality-as-cooperation” with a new questionnaire. Journal of Research in Personality, 78, 106–124. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2018.10.008
11.
DaviesC. L.SibleyC. G.LiuJ. H. (2014). Confirmatory factor analysis of the Moral Foundations Questionnaire: Independent scale validation in a New Zealand sample. Social Psychology, 45(6), 431–436. https://doi.org/10.1027/1864-9335/a000201
12.
DavisD.DooleyM.HookJ.ChoeE.McElroy-HeltzelS. (2016). The purity/sanctity subscale of the moral foundations questionnaire does not work similarly for religious versus non-deligious individuals. Psychology of Religion and Spirituality, 9, 124–130. https://doi.org/10.1037/rel0000057
13.
DavisD.RiceK.Van TongerenD. R.HookJ. N.DeBlaereC.WorthingtonE. L.ChoeE. (2016). The moral foundations hypothesis does not replicate well in Black samples. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 110(4), e23–e30. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000056
DoğruyolB.AlperS.YilmazO. (2019). The five-factor model of the moral foundations theory is stable across WEIRD and non-WEIRD cultures. Personality and Individual Differences, 151, 109547. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2019.109547
16.
GiacomantonioM.PierroA.BaldnerC.KruglanskiA. (2017). Need for closure, torture, and punishment motivations: The mediating role of moral foundations. Social Psychology, 48(6), 335–347. https://doi.org/10.1027/1864-9335/a000321
17.
GloverR. J.NatesanP.WangJ.RohrD.McAfee-EtheridgeL.BookerD. D.BishopJ.LeeD.KildareC.WuM. (2014). Moral rationality and intuition: An exploration of relationships between the Defining Issues Test and the Moral Foundations Questionnaire. Journal of Moral Education, 43(4), 395–412. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057240.2014.953043
18.
GrahamJ.HaidtJ.NosekB. A. (2009). Liberals and conservatives rely on different sets of moral foundations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96(5), 1029–1046. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0015141
19.
GrahamJ.NosekB. A.HaidtJ.IyerR.KolevaS.DittoP. H. (2011). Mapping the moral domain. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 101(2), 366–385. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0021847
20.
HaidtJ. (2007). The new synthesis in moral psychology. Science, 316(5827), 998–1002.
21.
HaidtJ.GrahamJ. (2007). When morality opposes justice: Conservatives have moral intuitions that liberals may not recognize. Social Justice Research, 20(1), 98–116. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11211-007-0034-z
HooperD.CoughlanJ.MullenM. (2008). Structural equation modelling: Guidelines for determining model fit. Journal of Business Research Methods, 6(1), 53–60.
24.
HuL.-T.BentlerP. M. (1995). Evaluating model fit. In HoyleR. H. (Ed.), Structural equation modeling: Concepts, issues, and applications (pp. 76–99). Sage.
25.
IurinoK.SaucierG. (2020). Testing measurement invariance of the moral foundations questionnaire across 27 countries. Assessment, 27(2), 365–372. https://doi.org/10.1177/1073191118817916
26.
KahaneG.EverettJ. A. C.EarpB. D.CaviolaL.FaberN. S.CrockettM. J.SavulescuJ. (2018). Beyond sacrificial harm: A two-dimensional model of utilitarian psychology. Psychological Review, 125(2), 131–164. https://doi.org/10.1037/rev0000093
27.
KivikangasJ. M.Fernández-CastillaB.JärveläS.RavajaN.LönnqvistJ.-E. (2021). Moral foundations and political orientation: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 147(1), 55–94.
28.
MarshH. W.HauK.-T.WenZ. (2004). In search of golden rules: Comment on hypothesis-testing approaches to setting cutoff values for fit indexes and dangers in overgeneralizing Hu and Bentler’s (1999) findings. Structural Equation Modeling, 11(3), 320–341.
NilssonA.ErlandssonA. (2015). The moral foundations taxonomy: Structural validity and relation to political ideology in Sweden. Personality and Individual Differences, 76, 28–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2014.11.049
32.
NilssonA.ErlandssonA.VästfjällD. (2020). Moral foundations theory and the psychology of charitable giving. European Journal of Personality, 34(3), 431–447. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.2256
33.
NisbettR. E.WilsonT. D. (1977). Telling more than we can know: Verbal reports on mental processes. Psychological Review, 84(3), 231–259.
34.
PennycookG.CheyneJ. A.BarrN.KoehlerD. J.FugelsangJ. A. (2014). The role of analytic thinking in moral judgements and values. Thinking & Reasoning, 20(2), 188–214. https://doi.org/10.1080/13546783.2013.865000
35.
R Core Team. (2022). R: A language and environment for statistical computing (4.2.0). R Foundation for Statistical Computing.
36.
SingelisT. M. (1994). The measurement of independent and interdependent self-construals. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 20(5), 580–591. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167294205014
37.
SteigerJ. H.LindJ. C. (1980). Statistically based tests for the number of common factors. Annual Meeting of the Psychometric Society, Iowa City, IA, United States.
38.
SuttonG. W.KellyH. L.HuverM. E. (2020). Political identities, religious identity, and the pattern of moral foundations among conservative Christians. Journal of Psychology and Theology, 48(3), 169–187. https://doi.org/10.1177/0091647119878675
39.
TuckerL. R.LewisC. (1973). A reliability coefficient for maximum likelihood factor analysis. Psychometrika, 38(1), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02291170
40.
TuellerS. J.JohnsonK. L.GrimmK. J.DesmaraisS. L.SellersB. G.Van DornR. A. (2017). Effects of sample size and distributional assumptions on competing models of the factor structure of the PANSS and BPRS. International Journal of Methods in Psychiatric Research, 26(4), e1549. https://doi.org/10.1002/mpr.1549
41.
WebsterD. M.KruglanskiA. W. (1994). Individual differences in need for cognitive closure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67(6), 1049–1062.
42.
WilliamsonW. P.HoodR. W.AhmadA.SadiqM.HillP. C. (2010). The Intratextual Fundamentalism Scale: Cross-cultural application, validity evidence, and relationship with religious orientation and the Big 5 factor markers. Mental Health, Religion & Culture, 13(7–8), 721–747. https://doi.org/10.1080/13674670802643047
43.
YalçındağB.ÖzkanT.CesurS.YilmazO.TepeB.PiyaleZ. E.BitenA. F.SunarD. (2019). An investigation of moral foundations theory in Turkey using different measures. Current Psychology, 38(2), 440–457. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-017-9618-4
44.
ZakharinM.BatesT. C. (2021). Remapping the foundations of morality: Well-fitting structural model of the Moral Foundations Questionnaire. PLOS ONE, 16(10), Article e0258910. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0258910
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.
