Future self-perceptions seem to promote far-sighted decisions in intertemporal choices. Previous work suggested that future self-relatedness, the extent to which we feel similar and connected to our future self, is associated with moral concerns. We aimed to extend these findings to everyday moral judgments and behavior using experience sampling methods. In addition, we assessed how moral foundation concerns mediate the relationship between future self-relatedness and moral behavior. Participants (N = 151) reported their state-levels of future self-relatedness, individualizing, and binding moral foundations and answered whether they performed a moral action five times a day for seven days. Within- and between-participants future self-relatedness predicted daily fluctuations in individualizing and binding moral foundations concerns. On the behavioral level, only within-participants future self-relatedness predicted individualizing moral actions with individualizing moral foundations mediating this effect. Our findings suggest that within- and between-person changes in future self-relatedness might be used to predict everyday moral concerns and behavior.
AinslieG. (2013). Intertemporal bargaining predicts moral behavior, even in anonymous, one-shot economic games1. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 36(1), 78–79. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X12000684
3.
AlperS. (2020). Explaining the complex effect of construal level on moral and political attitudes. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 29, 115–120. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721419896362
4.
AlSheddiM.RussellS.HegartyP. (2020). How does culture shape our moral identity? Moral foundations in Saudi Arabia and Britain. European Journal of Social Psychology, 50(1), 97–110. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2619
5.
AquinoK.FreemanD.ReedI. I.LimV. K. G.FelpsW. (2009). Testing a social-cognitive model of moral behavior: The interactive influence of situations and moral identity centrality. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 97(1), 123–141. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0015406
6.
AronA. P.MashekD. J.AronE. N. (2004). Closeness as including other in the self. In MashekD. J.AronA. P. (Eds.), Handbook of closeness and intimacy (pp. 27–41). Lawrence Erlbaum.
7.
BarghJ. A.PrattoF. (1986). Individual construct accessibility and perceptual selection. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 22(4), 293–311. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-1031(86)90016-8
8.
BarrettL. F.BarrettD. J. (2001). An introduction to computerized experience sampling in psychology. Social Science Computer Review, 19(2), 175–185. https://doi.org/10.1177/08944393010190020
9.
BartelsD. M.RipsL. J. (2010). Psychological connectedness and intertemporal choice. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 139, 49–69. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0018062
10.
BartelsD. M.UrminskyO. (2011). On intertemporal selfishness: How the perceived instability of identity underlies impatient consumption. Journal of Consumer Research, 38(1), 182–198. https://doi.org/10.1086/658339
11.
BartelsD. M.UrminskyO. (2015). To know and to care: How awareness and valuation of the future jointly shape consumer spending. Journal of Consumer Research, 41, 1469–1485. https://doi.org/10.1086/680670
12.
BatesD.MächlerM.BolkerB.WalkerS. (2015). Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software, 67, 1–48. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v067.i01
13.
BaumeisterR. F.WrightB. R. E.CarreonD. (2019). Self-control “in the wild”: Experience sampling study of trait and state self-regulation. Self and Identity, 18(5), 494–528. https://doi.org/10.1080/15298868.2018.1478324
BeckE. D.JacksonJ. J. (2020). Idiographic traits: A return to Allportian approaches to personality. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 29(3), 301–308. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721420915860
17.
BelkR. W. (1988). Possessions and the extended self. Journal of Consumer Research, 15(2), 139–168. https://doi.org/10.1086/209154
18.
BixterM. T.McMichaelS. L.BunkerC. J.AdelmanR. M.OkunM. A.GrimmK. J.GraudejusO.KwanV. S. Y. (2020). A test of a triadic conceptualization of future self-identification. PLOS ONE, 15(11), Article e0242504. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0242504
19.
BurumB. A.GilbertD. T.WilsonT. D. (2016). Becoming stranger: When future selves join the out-group. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 145, 1132–1140. https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0000193
20.
ChenH.CohenP.ChenS. (2010). How big is a big odds ratio? Interpreting the magnitudes of odds ratios in epidemiological studies. Communications in Statistics—Simulation and Computation, 39(4), 860–864. https://doi.org/10.1080/03610911003650383
21.
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
22.
CohenJ. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum.
23.
CranfordJ. A.ShroutP. E.IidaM.RafaeliE.YipT.BolgerN. (2006). A procedure for evaluating sensitivity to within-person change: Can mood measures in diary studies detect change reliably?Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 32(7), 917–929. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167206287721
24.
CsikszentmihalyiM.LarsonR. (1987). Validity and reliability of the experience-sampling method. The Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 175, 526–536. https://doi.org/10.1097/00005053-198709000-00004
25.
CurranP. J.BauerD. J. (2011). The disaggregation of within-person and between-person effects in longitudinal models of change. Annual Review of Psychology, 62(1), 583–619. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.093008.100356
26.
CurranP. J.LeeT. H.HowardA. H.LaneS. T.MacCallumR. C. (2021). Disaggregating within-person and between-person effects in multilevel and structural equation growth models. In HancockG. (Ed.), Advances in longitudinal methods in the social and behavioral sciences (pp. 217–253). Information Age.
27.
Dal BóE.TerviöM. (2013). Self-esteem, moral capital, and wrongdoing. Journal of the European Economic Association, 11(3), 599–663. https://doi.org/10.1111/jeea.12012
28.
DehghaniM.JohnsonK.HooverJ.SagiE.GartenJ.ParmarN. J.VaiseyS.IlievR.GrahamJ. (2016). Purity homophily in social networks. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 145, 366–375. https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0000139
29.
DejonckheereE. P.ErbasY. I. (2021). Designing an experience sampling study. In Myin-GermeysI.KuppensP. (Eds.), The open handbook of experience sampling methodology: A step-by-step guide to designing, conducting, and analyzing ESM studies (pp. 21–32). Center for Research on Experience Sampling and Ambulatory Methods Leuven.
30.
EiseleG.LafitG.VachonH.KuppensP.HoubenM.Myin-GermeysI.ViechtbauerW. (2021). Affective structure, measurement invariance, and reliability across different experience sampling protocols. Journal of Research in Personality, 92, 104094. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2021.104094
31.
ElsterJ. (1989). Social norms and economic theory. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 3(4), 99–117.
32.
Ersner-HershfieldH.GartonM. T.BallardK.Samanez-LarkinG. R.KnutsonB. (2009). Don’t stop thinking about tomorrow: Individual differences in future self-continuity account for saving. Judgment and Decision Making, 4(4), 280–286.
33.
Ersner-HershfieldH.WimmerG. E.KnutsonB. (2009). Saving for the future self: Neural measures of future self-continuity predict temporal discounting. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, 4(1), 85–92. https://doi.org/10.1093/scan/nsn042
34.
FehrR.YamK. C. (S.)DangC. (2015). Moralized leadership: The construction and consequences of ethical leader perceptions. Academy of Management Review, 40(2), 182–209. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2013.0358
35.
FinniganK. M.VazireS. (2018). The incremental validity of average state self-reports over global self-reports of personality. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 115(2), 321–337. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000136
36.
FleesonW. (2001). Toward a structure- and process-integrated view of personality: Traits as density distributions of states. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80(6), 1011–1027. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.80.6.1011
37.
FleesonW.GallagherP. (2009). The implications of Big Five standing for the distribution of trait manifestation in behavior: Fifteen experience-sampling studies and a meta-analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 97(6), 1097–1114. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0016786
38.
FleesonW.LawM. K. (2015). Trait enactments as density distributions: The role of actors, situations, and observers in explaining stability and variability. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 109(6), 1090–1104. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0039517
39.
FleesonW.MalanosA. B.AchilleN. M. (2002). An intraindividual process approach to the relationship between extraversion and positive affect: Is acting extraverted as “good” as being extraverted?Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83(6), 1409–1422. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.83.6.1409
40.
FranksA. S.ScherrK. C. (2015). Using moral foundations to predict voting behavior: Regression models from the 2012 U.S. Presidential election. Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy, 15, 213–232. https://doi.org/10.1111/asap.12074
41.
FrederickS.LoewensteinG.O’DonoghueT. (2002). Time discounting and time preference: A critical review. Journal of Economic Literature, 40(2), 351–401. https://doi.org/10.1257/002205102320161311
42.
FridhandlerB. M. (1986). Conceptual note on state, trait, and the state–trait distinction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50(1), 169–174. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.50.1.169
43.
FujitaK.TropeY.LibermanN.Levin-SagiM. (2006). Construal levels and self-control. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90, 351–367. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.90.3.351
44.
GinoF.SchweitzerM. E.MeadN. L.ArielyD. (2011). Unable to resist temptation: How self-control depletion promotes unethical behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 115(2), 191–203. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2011.03.001
GrahamJ.HaidtJ.KolevaS.MotylM.IyerR.WojcikS. P.DittoP. H. (2013). Chapter two—Moral foundations theory: The pragmatic validity of moral pluralism. In DevineP.PlantA. (Eds.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 47, pp. 55–130). Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-407236-7.00002-4
47.
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
48.
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
49.
GrolnickW. S.RyanR. M. (1989). Parent styles associated with children’s self-regulation and competence in school. Journal of Educational Psychology, 81, 143–154. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.81.2.143
50.
HahnL.TamboriniR.PrabhuS.GrallC.NovotnyE.KlebigB. (2021). Narrative Media’s Emphasis on Distinct Moral Intuitions Alters Early Adolescents’ Judgments. Journal of Media Psychology, 34(3), 165–176. https://doi.org/10.1027/1864-1105/a000307
51.
HaidtJ. (2001). The emotional dog and its rational tail: A social intuitionist approach to moral judgment. Psychological Review, 108, 814–834. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.108.4.814
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
HamakerE. L. (2012). Why researchers should think “within-person”: A paradigmatic rationale. In. In MehlM. R.ConnerT. S. (Eds.), Handbook of research methods for studying daily life (pp. 43–61). Guilford Press.
56.
HatemiP. K.CrabtreeC.SmithK. B. (2019). Ideology justifies morality: Political beliefs predict moral foundations. American Journal of Political Science, 63(4), 788–806. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajps.12448
57.
HayesA. F. (2018). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach (2nd ed.). Guilford Press.
58.
HershfieldH. E. (2011). Future self-continuity: How conceptions of the future self transform intertemporal choice. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1235(1), 30–43. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-6632.2011.06201.x
59.
HershfieldH. E.CohenT. R.ThompsonL. (2012). Short horizons and tempting situations: Lack of continuity to our future selves leads to unethical decision making and behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 117(2), 298–310. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2011.11.002
60.
HershfieldH. E.GoldsteinD. G.SharpeW. F.FoxJ.YeykelisL.CarstensenL. L.BailensonJ. N. (2011). Increasing saving behavior through age-progressed renderings of the future self. Journal of Marketing Research, 48(SPL), S23–S37. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkr.48.SPL.S23
61.
HigginsE. T.RholesW. S.JonesC. R. (1977). Category accessibility and impression formation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 13, 141–154. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-1031(77)80007-3
62.
HochS. J.LoewensteinG. F. (1991). Time-inconsistent preferences and consumer self-control. Journal of Consumer Research, 17(4), 492–507. https://doi.org/10.1086/208573
63.
HoffmanL.StawskiR. S. (2009). Persons as contexts: Evaluating between-person and within-person effects in longitudinal analysis. Research in Human Development, 6, 97–120. https://doi.org/10.1080/15427600902911189
64.
HofmannW.BrandtM. J.WisneskiD. C.RockenbachB.SkitkaL. J. (2018). Moral punishment in everyday life. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 44(12), 1697–1711. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167218775075
ImaiK.KeeleL.TingleyD. (2010). A general approach to causal mediation analysis. Psychological Methods, 15(4), 309–334. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0020761
JonasonP. K.StrosserG. L.KrollC. H.DuineveldJ. J.BaruffiS. A. (2015). Valuing myself over others: The Dark Triad traits and moral and social values. Personality and Individual Differences, 81, 102–106. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2014.10.045
69.
KingG.TomzM.WittenbergJ. (2000). Making the most of statistical analyses: Improving interpretation and presentation. American Journal of Political Science, 44, 341–355.
70.
KirbyK. N. (1997). Bidding on the future: Evidence against normative discounting of delayed rewards. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 126(1), 54–70. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.126.1.54
71.
KirbyK. N.MarakovićN. N. (1995). Modeling myopic decisions: Evidence for hyperbolic delay-discounting within subjects and amounts. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 64(1), 22–30. https://doi.org/10.1006/obhd.1995.1086
72.
KirbyK. N.MarakovićN. N. (1996). Delay-discounting probabilistic rewards: Rates decrease as amounts increase. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 3(1), 100–104. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03210748
73.
KohlbergL. (1969). Stage and sequence: The cognitive-developmental approach to socialization. In GoslinD. (Ed.), Handbook of socialization theory and research (pp. 347–480). Rand McNally.
74.
KuppensP.Myin-GermeysI. (2021). Possible research questions that can be answered with ESM research. In KuppensP.Myin-GermeysI. (Eds.), The open handbook of experience sampling methodology: A step-by-step guide to designing, conducting, and analyzing ESM studies (pp. 21–32). Center for Research on Experience Sampling and Ambulatory Methods Leuven.
75.
KuznetsovaA.BrockhoffP. B.ChristensenR. H. B. (2017). LmerTest package: Tests in linear mixed effects models. Journal of Statistical Software, 82, 1–26. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v082.i13
LucasC.WongP.KleinJ.CastroT. B. R.SilvaJ.SundaramM.EllingsonM. K.MaoT.OhJ. E.IsraelowB.TakahashiT.TokuyamaM.LuP.VenkataramanA.ParkA.MohantyS.WangH.WyllieA. L.VogelsC. B. F.IwasakiA. (2020). Longitudinal analyses reveal immunological misfiring in severe COVID-19. Nature, 584(7821), 463–469. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-020-2588-y
78.
LüdeckeD.Ben-ShacharM. S.PatilI.WaggonerP.MakowskiD. (2021). Performance: An R package for assessment, comparison and testing of statistical models. The Journal of Open Source Software, 6(60), 3139. https://doi.org/10.21105/joss.03139
MazarN.AmirO.ArielyD. (2008). The dishonesty of honest people: A theory of self-concept maintenance. Journal of Marketing Research, 45(6), 633–644. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkr.45.6.633
81.
McConnellA. R. (2011). The multiple self-aspects framework: Self-concept representation and its implications. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 15, 3–27. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868310371101
MilesiP.AlbericiA. I. (2018). Pluralistic morality and collective action: The role of moral foundations. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 21(2), 235–256. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430216675707
84.
MolenaarP. C. M. (2004). A manifesto on psychology as idiographic science: Bringing the person back into scientific psychology, this time forever. Measurement: Interdisciplinary Research and Perspectives, 2(4), 201–218. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15366359mea0204_1
85.
MolenaarP. C. M.CampbellC. G. (2009). The new person-specific paradigm in psychology. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 18(2), 112–117. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8721.2009.01619.x
86.
MooijmanM.MeindlP.OysermanD.MonterossoJ.DehghaniM.DorisJ. M.GrahamJ. (2018). Resisting temptation for the good of the group: Binding moral values and the moralization of self-control. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 115, 585–599. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000149
87.
Myin-GermeysI.van OsJ.SchwartzJ. E.StoneA. A.DelespaulP. A. (2001). Emotional reactivity to daily life stress in psychosis. Archives of General Psychiatry, 58(12), 1137–1144. https://doi.org/10.1001/archpsyc.58.12.1137
88.
NailP. R.McGregorI.DrinkwaterA. E.SteeleG. M.ThompsonA. W. (2009). Threat causes liberals to think like conservatives. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 45(4), 901–907. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2009.04.013
89.
NakagawaS.JohnsonP. C. D.SchielzethH. (2017). The coefficient of determination R2 and intra-class correlation coefficient from generalized linear mixed-effects models revisited and expanded. Journal of the Royal Society Interface, 14(134), 20170213. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsif.2017.0213
90.
NakagawaS.SchielzethH. (2013). A general and simple method for obtaining R2 from generalized linear mixed-effects models. Methods in Ecology and Evolution, 4(2), 133–142. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2041-210x.2012.00261.x
91.
NapierJ. L.LuguriJ. B. (2013). Moral mind-sets: Abstract thinking increases a preference for “individualizing” over “binding” moral foundations. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 4, 754–759. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550612473783
92.
NezlekJ. B. (2017). A practical guide to understanding reliability in studies of within-person variability. Journal of Research in Personality, 69, 149–155. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2016.06.020
93.
NilssonA.ErlandssonA.VästfjällD. (2016). The congruency between moral foundations and intentions to donate, self-reported donations, and actual donations to charity. Journal of Research in Personality, 65, 22–29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2016.07.001
94.
O’ConnorD. B.ConnerM.JonesF.McMillanB.FergusonE. (2009). Exploring the benefits of conscientiousness: An investigation of the role of daily stressors and health behaviors. Annals of Behavioral Medicine, 37(2), 184–196. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12160-009-9087-6
95.
ObeidN.ArgoN.GingesJ. (2017). How moral perceptions influence intergroup tolerance: Evidence from Lebanon, Morocco, and the United States. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 43(3), 381–391. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167216686560
ParfitD. (1984). Reasons and persons. Oxford University Press.
98.
PeM. L.RaesF.KovalP.BransK.VerduynP.KuppensP. (2013). Interference resolution moderates the impact of rumination and reappraisal on affective experiences in daily life. Cognition and Emotion, 27(3), 492–501. https://doi.org/10.1080/02699931.2012.719489
99.
PiagetJ. (1948). The moral judgment of the child. The Free Press. (Original work published 1932)
100.
PiazzaJ.BeringJ. M. (2008). Concerns about reputation via gossip promote generous allocations in an economic game. Evolution and Human Behavior, 29(3), 172–178. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2007.12.002
101.
PrenticeM.JayawickremeE.FleesonW. (2020). An experience sampling study of the momentary dynamics of moral, autonomous, competent, and related need satisfactions, moral enactments, and psychological thriving. Motivation and Emotion, 44(2), 244–256. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11031-020-09829-3
102.
ProninE.OlivolaC. Y.KennedyK. A. (2008). Doing unto future selves as you would do unto others: Psychological distance and decision making. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 34(2), 224–236. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167207310023
103.
ProninE.RossL. (2006). Temporal differences in trait self-ascription: When the self is seen as an other. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90, 197–209. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.90.2.197
104.
RobinsonM. D.CloreG. L. (2002). Belief and feeling: Evidence for an accessibility model of emotional self-report. Psychological Bulletin, 128, 934–960. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.128.6.934
105.
SchellingT. C. (1984). Self-command in practice, in policy, and in a theory of rational choice. The American Economic Review, 74(2), 1–11.
106.
SchwartzS. H.BilskyW. (1990). Toward a theory of the universal content and structure of values: Extensions and cross-cultural replications. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58, 878–891. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.58.5.878
ShroutP. E. (1998). Measurement reliability and agreement in psychiatry. Statistical Methods in Medical Research, 7(3), 301–317. https://doi.org/10.1177/096228029800700306
109.
ShroutP. E.LaneS. P. (2012). Psychometrics. In MehlM. R.ConnerT. S. (Eds.), Handbook of research methods for studying daily life (pp. 302–320). Guilford Press.
110.
SilverI.ShawA. (2018). No harm, still foul: Concerns about reputation drive dislike of harmless plagiarizers. Cognitive Science, 42(S1), 213–240. https://doi.org/10.1111/cogs.12500
111.
SilverJ. R.SilverE. (2017). Why are conservatives more punitive than liberals? A moral foundations approach. Law and Human Behavior, 41, 258–272. https://doi.org/10.1037/lhb0000232
112.
SilverJ. R.SilverE. (2021). The nature and role of morality in offending: A moral foundations approach. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 58(3), 343–380. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022427820960201
113.
SokolY.SerperM. (2020). Development and validation of a Future Self-Continuity Questionnaire: A preliminary report. Journal of Personality Assessment, 102(5), 677–688. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223891.2019.1611588
114.
SperberD.BaumardN. (2012). Moral reputation: An evolutionary and cognitive perspective. Mind & Language, 27(5), 495–518. https://doi.org/10.1111/mila.12000
115.
StoffelM. A.NakagawaS.SchielzethH. (2021). PartR2: Partitioning R2 in generalized linear mixed models. PeerJ, 9, e11414. https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.11414
116.
Strupp-LevitskyM.NoorbaloochiS.ShipleyA.JostJ. T. (2020). Moral “foundations” as the product of motivated social cognition: Empathy and other psychological underpinnings of ideological divergence in “individualizing” and “binding” concerns. PLOS ONE, 15, Article e0241144. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0241144
117.
SüssenbachP.ReesJ.GollwitzerM. (2019). When the going gets tough, individualizers get going: On the relationship between moral foundations and prosociality. Personality and Individual Differences, 136, 122–131. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2018.01.019
118.
TajfelH.TurnerJ. C. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In WorchelS.AustinW. G. (Eds.), The social psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 33–47). Brooks/Cole.
119.
TamboriniR.BowmanN. D.PrabhuS.HahnL.KlebigB.GrallC.NovotnyE. (2018). The effect of moral intuitions on decisions in video game play: The impact of chronic and temporary intuition accessibility. New Media & Society, 20(2), 564–580. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444816664356
120.
TamboriniR.HoferM.PrabhuS.GrallC.NovotnyE. R.HahnL.KlebigB. (2017). The impact of terrorist attack news on moral intuitions and outgroup prejudice. Mass Communication and Society, 20(6), 800–824. https://doi.org/10.1080/15205436.2017.1342130
121.
ThalerR. H.ShefrinH. M. (1981). An economic theory of self-control. Journal of Political Economy, 89(2), 392–406.
122.
TingleyD.YamamotoT.HiroseK.KeeleL.ImaiK. (2014). Mediation: R package for causal mediation analysis. Journal of Statistical Software, 59(1), 1–38. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v059.i05
123.
TomkoR. L.CarpenterR. W.BrownW. C.SolhanM. B.JahngS.WoodP. K.TrullT. J. (2014). Measuring impulsivity in daily life: The Momentary Impulsivity Scale. Psychological Assessment, 26(2), 339–349. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0035083
124.
UrminskyO. (2017). The role of psychological connectedness to the future self in decisions over time. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 26(1), 34–39. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721416668810
125.
van den BergT. G. C.KroesenM.ChorusC. G. (2022). Why are general moral values poor predictors of concrete moral behavior in everyday life? A conceptual analysis and empirical study. Frontiers in Psychology, 13. https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.817860
126.
Van de VyverJ.HoustonD. M.AbramsD.VasiljevicM. (2016). Boosting belligerence: How the July 7, 2005, London bombings affected liberals’ moral foundations and prejudice. Psychological Science, 27(2), 169–177. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797615615584
127.
van GelderJ.-L.HershfieldH. E.NordgrenL. F. (2013). Vividness of the future self predicts delinquency. Psychological Science, 24(6), 974–980. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797612465197
128.
Van GelderJ.-L.LucianoE. C.Weulen KranenbargM.HershfieldH. E. (2015). Friends with My Future Self: Longitudinal Vividness Intervention Reduces Delinquency. Criminology, 53(2), 158–179. https://doi.org/10.1111/1745-9125.12064
129.
Van LeeuwenF.ParkJ. H. (2009). Perceptions of social dangers, moral foundations, and political orientation. Personality and Individual Differences, 47, 169–173. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2009.02.017
130.
VerhaeghenP. (2021). Mindfulness as Attention Training: Meta-Analyses on the Links Between Attention Performance and Mindfulness Interventions, Long-Term Meditation Practice, and Trait Mindfulness. Mindfulness, 12(3), 564–581. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12671-020-01532-1
131.
VerhaeghenP.AikmanS. N. (2020). How the Mindfulness Manifold Relates to the Five Moral Foundations, Prejudice, and Awareness of Privilege. Mindfulness, 11(1), 241–254. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12671-019-01243-2
132.
VaughanT. J.Bell HolleranL.SilverJ. R. (2019). Applying moral foundations theory to the explanation of capital jurors’ sentencing decisions. Justice Quarterly, 36(7), 1176–1205. https://doi.org/10.1080/07418825.2018.1537400
133.
WakslakC. J.NussbaumS.LibermanN.TropeY. (2008). Representations of the self in the near and distant future. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95, 757–773. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0012939
134.
WangL. P.MaxwellS. E. (2015). On disaggregating between-person and within-person effects with longitudinal data using multilevel models. Psychological Methods, 20(1), 63–83. https://doi.org/10.1037/met0000030
135.
WeermeijerJ.KiekensG.WampersM. (2021). Experience sampling platforms. In Myin-GermeysI.KuppensP. (Eds.), The open handbook of experience sampling methodology: A step-by-step guide to designing, conducting, and analyzing ESM studies (pp. 21–32). Center for Research on Experience Sampling and Ambulatory Methods Leuven.
136.
WrightJ. C.BarilG. (2011). The role of cognitive resources in determining our moral intuitions: Are we all liberals at heart?Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 47, 1007–1012. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2011.03.014
137.
WrzusC.NeubauerA. B. (2023). Ecological momentary assessment: A meta-analysis on designs, samples, and compliance across research fields. Assessment, 30, 825–846. https://doi.org/10.1177/10731911211067538
138.
YilmazO.SaribayS. A. (2017). The relationship between cognitive style and political orientation depends on the measures used. Judgment and Decision Making, 12, 140–147.
139.
YoungL.ChakroffA.TomJ. (2012). Doing good leads to more good: The reinforcing power of a moral self-concept. Review of Philosophy and Psychology, 3(3), 325–334. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13164-012-0111-6
140.
YudkinD. A.GantmanA. P.HofmannW.QuoidbachJ. (2021). Binding moral values gain importance in the presence of close others. Nature Communications, 12(1), 2718. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-021-22566-6
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.
