“They should have followed the rules”: Trade-offs Between Fairness and Authority Values Predict Judgments of Social Justice Protests

Abstract

In 2017, Colin Kaepernick drew global attention by kneeling during the national anthem before a football game. The protest divided the country into two groups: those who supported Kaepernick’s stand against inequality and those who believed it was disrespectful. The current study investigates whether differences in moral values (i.e., fairness vs. respect for authority) predict an individual’s opinion of the protestors and whether priming one of those values influences opinions on social justice protests more broadly. Our data support the moral trade-off hypothesis by demonstrating that when values are in conflict, the degree to which individuals value fairness versus authority predicts their opinions of the protesters. These differences in fairness versus authority also extended to judgments of other kinds of social justice protests. These findings support the moral foundations theory as a useful tool for investigating the influence of moral values on perceptions of social issues and subsequent behavior.

Keywords

moral judgment social justice collective action personal values attribution

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Alicke

M. D.

Buckingham

Zell

Davis

(2008). Culpable control and counterfactual reasoning in the psychology of blame. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 34, 1371–1381. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167208321594

Clark

C. J.

Luguri

J. B.

Ditto

P. H.

Knobe

Shariff

A. F.

Baumeister

R. F.

(2014). Free to punish: A motivated account of free will belief. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 106, 501–513. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0035880

Feinberg

Willer

(2013). The moral roots of environmental attitudes. Psychological Science, 24, 56–62. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797612449177

Gilligan

(1982). In a different voice: Psychological theory and women’s development. Harvard University Press.

Goodwin

G. P.

Piazza

Rozin

(2014). Moral character predominates in person perception and evaluation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 106, 148–168. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0034726

Graham

Haidt

Nosek

B. 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

Graham

Nosek

B. A.

Haidt

Iyer

Koleva

Ditto

P. H.

(2011). Mapping the moral domain. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 101, 366–385. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0021847

Knobe

(2003). Intentional action and side effects in ordinary language. Analysis, 63, 190–194. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8284.00419

Kohlberg

(1969). Stage and sequence: The cognitive-developmental approach to socialization. In Goslin

D. A.

(Ed.), Handbook of socialization theory and research (pp. 347–480). Rand McNally.

10.

Koleva

S. P.

Graham

Iyer

Ditto

P. H.

Haidt

(2012). Tracing the threads: How five moral concerns (especially Purity) help explain culture war attitudes. Journal of Research in Personality, 46, 184–194. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2012.01.006

11.

LaCosse

Krusemark

Foltz

Plant

E. A.

(2019). Antiprejudice among white Americans and the proactive fight to end discrimination toward black Americans [Manuscript in revision].

12.

Low

Wui

M. G. L.

(2015). Moral foundations and attitudes towards the poor. Current Psychology, 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-015-9333-y

13.

Monroe

A. E.

Plant

E. A.

(2019). The dark side of morality: Prioritizing sanctity over care motivates denial of mind and prejudice toward sexual outgroups. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 148, 342–360.

14.

Rottman

Kelemen

Young

(2014). Tainting the soul: Purity concerns predict moral judgments of suicide. Cognition, 130, 217–226. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2013.11.007

15.

Smith

I. H.

Aquino

Koleva

Graham

(2014). The moral ties that bind…even to out-groups: The interactive effect of moral identity and the binding moral foundations. Psychological Science, 25, 1554–1562. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797614534450

16.

Strohminger

Nichols

(2015). Neurodegeneration and identity. Psychological Science. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797615592381

17.

Turiel

(1983). The development of social knowledge: Morality and convention. Cambridge University Press.

18.

Waytz

Dungan

Young

(2013). The whistleblower’s dilemma and the fairness–loyalty tradeoff. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 49, 1027–1033. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2013.07.002

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.

0.00 MB

0.30 MB