Generalized morality refers to the use of prior knowledge of others’ morality to infer unknown aspects of morality, which is a crucial heuristic for obtaining cooperative partners in a large society. This research investigated how information is used for generalized morality. It was predicted that group-level generalized morality, or moral stereotyping, would come first when the information is limited, thereby people rely on a surface cue. As information increases, they come to use individual-level generalized morality, which is shown by Jackson et al. Following Jackson et al., the current research employed an agent-based modeling (Study 1) and human study (Study 2). Study 1 found that participants used moral stereotyping first in their interactions when the visual cue-morality association was salient. Study 2 also showed the same trend. This research worked as a replication of the previous study and as an important extension to understanding how moral cognition develops.
AbeleA. E.EllemersN.FiskeS. T.KochA.YzerbytV. (2021). Navigating the social world: Toward an integrated framework for evaluating self, individuals, and groups. Psychological Review, 128, 290–314. https://doi.org/10.1037/rev0000262
AshmoreR. D.Del BocaF. K. (1979). Sex stereotypes and implicit personality theory: Toward a cognitive—Social psychological conceptualization. Sex Roles, 5, 219–248. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00287932
4.
BatesD.MaechlerM.BolkerB.WalkerS. (2014). lme4: Linear mixed-effects models using S4 classes (R package version 1.1-6). R.
5.
BermanJ. S.KennyD. A. (1976). Correlational bias in observer ratings. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 34(2), 263–273. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.34.2.263
6.
BerniūnasR.SiliusV.DranseikaV. (2022). Moralization East and West: Moralizing different transgressions among Chinese, Americans, and Lithuanians. Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 25, 185–197. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajsp.12479
7.
Čehajić-ClancyS.JankovićA.OpačinN.BilewiczM. (2023). The process of becoming “we”in an intergroup conflict context: How enhancing intergroup moral similarities leads to common-ingroup identity. British Journal of Social Psychology, 62, 1251–1270.
8.
ChuaK.-W.FreemanJ. B. (2022). Learning to judge a book by its cover: Rapid acquisition of facial stereotypes. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 98, 104225. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2021.104225
9.
CuddyA. J. C.FiskeS. T.KwanV. S. Y.GlickP.DemoulinS.LeyensJ.-P.BondM. H.CroizetJ.-C.EllemersN.SleebosE.HtunT. T.KimH.-J.MaioG.PerryJ.PetkovaK.TodorovV.Rodríguez-BailónR.MoralesE.MoyaM.. . .ZieglerR. (2009). Stereotype content model across cultures: Towards universal similarities and some differences. The British Journal of Social Psychology, 48, 1–33. https://doi.org/10.1348/014466608X314935
10.
CurryO. S. (2016). Morality as cooperation: A problem-centred approach. In The evolution of morality (pp. 27–51). Springer International Publishing.
11.
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. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2018.10.008
12.
EaglyA. H.AshmoreR. D.MakhijaniM. G.LongoL. C. (1991). What is beautiful is good, but. . .: A meta-analytic review of research on the physical attractiveness stereotype. Psychological Bulletin, 110, 109–128. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.110.1.109
13.
EckelC. C.WilsonR. K. (2003). The human face of game theory: Trust and reciprocity in sequential games. In OstromE.WalkerJ. (Eds.), Trust and reciprocity: Interdisciplinary lessons for experimental research (pp. 245–274). Russell Sage Foundation.
14.
FiskeS. T.CuddyA. J. C.GlickP.XuJ. (2002). A model of (often mixed) stereotype content: Competence and warmth respectively follow from perceived status and competition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82, 878–902. https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.82.6.878
15.
FiskeS. T.NeubergS. L. (1990). A continuum of impression formation, from category-based to individuating processes: Influences of information and motivation on attention and interpretation. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 23, 1–74. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60317-2
16.
GawronskiB.EhrenbergK.BanseR.ZukovaJ.KlauerK. C. (2003). It’s in the mind of the beholder: The impact of stereotypic associations on category-based and individuating impression formation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 39, 16–30. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0022-1031(02)00517-6
17.
GrahamJ.HaidtJ.NosekB. A. (2009). Liberals and conservatives rely on different sets of moral foundations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96, 1029–1046. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0015141
18.
GrahamJ.NosekB. A.HaidtJ.IyerR.KolevaS.DittoP. H. (2011). Mapping the moral domain. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 101, 366–385. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0021847
19.
HaidtJ.JosephC. (2007). The moral mind: How five sets of innate intuitions guide the development of many culture-specific virtues, and perhaps even modules. The Innate Mind, 3, 367–391.
20.
HanD. E.LaurentS. M. (2023). Beautiful seems good, but perhaps not in every way: Linking attractiveness to moral evaluation through perceived vanity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 124, 264–286. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspa0000317
21.
HeiphetzL. (2020). The development and consequences of moral essentialism. Advances in Child Development and Behavior, 59, 165–194. https://doi.org/10.1016/bs.acdb.2020.05.006
22.
HenningerF.ShevchenkoY.MertensU. K.KieslichP. J.HilbigB. E. (2022). Lab.js: A free, open, online study builder. Behavior Research Methods, 54, 556–573. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-019-01283-5
HesterN.GrayK. (2020). The moral psychology of raceless, genderless strangers. Perspectives on Psychological Science: A Journal of the Association for Psychological Science, 15, 216–230. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691619885840
25.
IshiiT.TakezawaM. (2017). Strategies for the inference of mental states: Projection and stereotyping. Japanese Journal of Social Psychology, 32, 187–199. (in Japanese with English abstract)
26.
JacksonJ. C.HalberstadtJ.TakezawaM.LiewK.SmithK.ApicellaC.GrayK. (2023). Generalized morality culturally evolves as an adaptive heuristic in large social networks. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 125, 1207–1238. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspa0000358
27.
KleblC.RheeJ. J.GreenawayK. H.LuoY.BastianB. (2022). Beauty goes down to the core: Attractiveness biases moral character attributions. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 46, 83–97.
28.
KuritaT.KusumiT. (2012). Ambivalent attitudes toward people with disabilities: Implicit and explicit stereotypes about their competence and warmth. The Japanese Journal of Special Education, 49, 481–492. https://doi.org/10.6033/tokkyou.49.481
29.
LeachS.KitchinA. P.SuttonR. M. (2023). Word embeddings reveal growing moral concern for people, animals and the environment. The British Journal of Social Psychology / The British Psychological Society, 62, 1925–1938. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjso.12663
30.
MarkusH. R.KitayamaS. (1991). Culture and the self: Implications for cognition, emotion, and motivation. Psychological Review, 98, 224–253. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.98.2.224
31.
MobiusM. M.RosenblatT. S. (2006). Why beauty matters. American Economic Review, 96, 222–235.
32.
NicolasG.BaiX.FiskeS. T. (2022). A spontaneous stereotype content model: Taxonomy, properties, and prediction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 123, 1243–1263. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspa0000312
33.
R Core Team. (2023). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing.
34.
ReineckeM. G.MaoY.KuneschM.Duéñez-GuzmánE. A.HaasJ.LeiboJ. Z. (2023). The puzzle of evaluating moral cognition in artificial agents. Cognitive Science, 47, Article e13315. https://doi.org/10.1111/cogs.13315
35.
RheeJ. J.ScheinC.BastianB. (2019). The what, how, and why of moralization: A review of current definitions, methods, and evidence in moralization research. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 13, Article e12511. https://doi.org/10.1111/spc3.12511
SakumaI. (2015). Images of social groups and social categories: An examination on stereotype content model. Bulletin of Living Science, 37, 67–75. (in Japanese)
38.
ScharlemannJ. P. W.EckelC. C.KacelnikA.WilsonR. K. (2001). The value of a smile: Game theory with a human face. Journal of Economic Psychology, 22, 617–640. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0167-4870(01)00059-9
39.
ShevchenkoY. (2022). Open Lab: A web application for running and sharing online experiments. Behavior Research Methods, 54, 3118–3125. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-021-01776-2
40.
ShimizuY.HashimotoT.KarasawaK. (2021). General cognition of various mental illnesses: Focusing on the Stereotype Content Mode. Japanese Journal of Social Psychology, 37, 36–42. (in Japanese with English abstract)
41.
TörnbergP. (2022). How digital media drive affective polarization through partisan sorting. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 119, Article e2207159119. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2207159119
XieS. Y.FlakeJ. K.StolierR. M.FreemanJ. B.HehmanE. (2021). Facial impressions are predicted by the structure of group stereotypes. Psychological Science, 32, 1979–1993. https://doi.org/10.1177/09567976211024259
46.
YamamotoM.OkaT. (2021). Association between stereotypical perceptions of persons infected with COVID-19 and individual differences in behavioral immune system. Shinrigaku Kenkyu: The Japanese Journal of Psychology, 92, 360–366. https://doi.org/10.4992/jjpsy.92.20334
47.
YukiM.SchugJ.HorikawaH.TakemuraK.SatoK.YokotaK.KamayaK. (2007). Development of a scale to measure perceptions of relational mobility in society. CERSS Working Paper 75, Center for Experimental Research in Social Sciences.
