Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

People increasingly view those with opposing political beliefs as less moral than those with shared political beliefs. Across two experiments, using a U.S. undergraduate sample (n = 1,070) and a U.S. resident online sample through Prolific (n = 402), we employed the Ultimatum Game (UG) to investigate whether acts of fairness, or even kindness, by persons with out-party political beliefs would mitigate moral derogation toward them. In neither experiment, did fairness or kindness by persons with opposite political beliefs moderate moral derogation. More extreme partisans engaged in even greater moral derogation of out-party (versus in-party) individuals, regardless of their acts of fairness or kindness. However, even self-identified moderate partisans engage in out-party moral derogation. The implications of these findings for political discourse and resolution for political conflict are discussed.

Keywords

political polarization moral derogation out-group hostility fairness political extremity

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Abramowitz

A. I.

Saunders

K. L.

(2008). Is polarization a myth? The Journal of Politics, 70(2), 542–555.

Abramowitz

A. I.

Webster

(2016). The rise of negative partisanship and the nationalization of U.S. elections in the 21st century. Electoral Studies, 41, 12–22.

Bandura

(1999). Moral disengagement in the perpetration of inhumanities. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 3, 193–209.

Boxell

Gentzkow

Shapiro

J. M.

(2020). Cross-country trends in affective polarization (No. w26669). National Bureau of Economic Research.

Brandt

M. J.

Reyna

Chambers

J. R.

Crawford

J. T.

Wetherell

(2014). The ideological-conflict hypothesis: Intolerance among both liberals and conservatives. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 23, 27–34. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721413510932

Champely

Ekstrom

Dalgaard

Gill

Weibelzahl

Anandkumar

Ford

Volcic

De Rosario

(2017). pwr: Basic functions for power analysis.

Chapman

H. A.

Kim

D. A.

Susskind

J. M.

Anderson

A. K.

(2009). In bad taste: Evidence for the oral origins of moral disgust. Science, 323(5918), 1222–1226. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1165565

Cohen

(1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum.

Cohen

West

S. G.

Aiken

L. S.

(2003). Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences (3rd ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum.

10.

Finkel

E. J.

Bail

C. A.

Cikara

Ditto

P. H.

Iyengar

Klar

Mason

McGrath

M. C.

Nyhan

Rand

D. G.

Skitka

L. J.

Tucker

J. A.

Van Bavel

J. J.

Wang

C. S.

Druckman

J. N.

(2020). Political sectarianism in America. Science, 370(6516), 533–536. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.abe1715

11.

Garrett

K. N.

Bankert

(2018). The moral roots of partisan division: How moral conviction heightens affective polarization. British Journal of Political Science, 50(2), 621–640. https://doi.org/10.1017/S000712341700059X

12.

Giner-Sorolla

Chapman

H. A.

(2017). Beyond purity: Moral disgust toward bad character. Psychological Science, 28, 80–91. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797616673193

13.

Graham

Haidt

Nosek

B. A.

(2009). Liberals and conservatives rely on different sets of moral foundations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96(5), 1029–1046.

14.

Güth

Schmittberger

Schwarze

(1982). An experimental analysis of ultimatum bargaining. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 3(4), 367–388. https://doi.org/10.1016/0167-2681(82)90011-7

15.

Harris

Van Bavel

J. J.

(2021). Preregistered replication of “feeling superior is a bipartisan issue: Extremity (not direction) of political views predicts perceived belief superiority.” Psychological Science, 32(3), 451–458.

16.

Hatemi

P. K.

Crabtree

Smith

K. B.

(2019). Ideology justifies morality: Political beliefs predict moral foundations. American Journal of Political Science, 63(4), 788–806.

17.

Hayes

A. F.

(2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach. Guilford Press.

18.

Huber

G. A.

Malhotra

(2017). Political homophily in social relationships: Evidence from online dating behavior. The Journal of Politics, 79(1), 269–283.

19.

Iyengar

Sood

Lelkes

(2012). Affect, not ideology: A social identity perspective on polarization. Public Opinion Quarterly, 76(3), 405–431.

20.

Iyengar

Westwood

S. J.

(2015). Fear and loathing across party lines: New evidence on group polarization. American Journal of Political Science, 59(3), 690–707.

21.

Mason

(2015). “I disrespectfully agree”: The differential effects of partisan sorting on social and issue polarization. American Journal of Political Science, 59(1), 128–145.

22.

Peterson

J. C.

Smith

K. B.

Hibbing

J. R.

(2020). Do people really become more conservative as they age? The Journal of Politics, 82(2), 600–611.

23.

Pew Research Center. (2014). Political polarization in the American public: How increasing ideological uniformity and partisan antipathy affect politics, compromise and everyday life. https://www.people-press.org/2014/06/12/political-polarization-in-the-american-public/

24.

Pew Research Center. (2016). Partisanship and political animosity in 2016: Highly negative views of the opposing party and its members. https://www.people-press.org/2016/06/22/partisanship-and-political-animosity-in-2016

25.

Reeder

G. D.

Brewer

M. B.

(1979). A schematic model of dispositional attribution in interpersonal perception. Psychological Review, 86, 61–79. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.86.1.61

26.

Strother

Piston

Golberstein

Gollust

S. E.

Eisenberg

(2021). College roommates have a modest but significant influence on each other’s political ideology. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 118(2), Article e2015514117.

27.

Tappin

B. M.

McKay

R. T.

(2019). Moral polarization and out-party hostility in the U. S. political context. Journal of Social and Political Psychology, 7(1), 213–245. https://doi.org/10.5964/jspp.v7i1.1090

28.

Uhlmann

E. L.

Pizarro

D. A.

Diermeier

(2015). A person-centered approach to moral judgment. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 10(1), 72–81. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691614556679

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

0.02 MB

The Great Divide: Neither Fairness Nor Kindness Eliminates Moral Derogation of People With Opposing Political Beliefs

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References

Supplementary Material