Catalogue Search | MBRL
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
{{itemTitle}}
456
result(s) for
"moral foundations"
Sort by:
Validation of the moral foundations questionnaire-2 in the Turkish context: exploring its relationship with moral behavior
Despite the considerable attention it has received, Moral Foundations Theory (MFT) remains open to criticisms regarding failure to conceptualize the moral domain. MFT was revised in response to these criticisms, along with its measurement tool, the Moral Foundations Questionnaire (MFQ-2). However, the validity of this revised theoretical structure and its explanatory power relative to existing alternatives, such as Morality as Cooperation Theory (MAC), has not yet been independently tested. Here we first validated MFT’s revised six-factor structure using the MFQ-2 in a large quasi-representative sample (
N
= 1099) from a predominantly Muslim country (i.e., Türkiye) and then explored the relationship of these six factors with incentivized measures of moral behavior as well as different psychological variables. Our tests revealed excellent fit values for the six-factor structure proposed by the MFQ-2, which explained more of the variance in criterion variables compared to the MAC Questionnaire (MAC-Q). However, MAC-Q performed better in predicting actual moral behavior (e.g., generosity and cooperation) compared with MFQ-2. Taken together, these findings indicate that, at least for the time being, MFQ-2 and the structure of the moral foundations proposed by MFT can be used to conceptualize the moral domain, but its relatively weak relationship to actual moral behavior limits its insights.
Journal Article
The Moral Foundations of Human Rights Attitudes
Human rights are claimed to be innate and based on moral principles. Human rights attitudes have been shown to be related to political ideology, but there have been few studies investigating their relationship with morality. Using moral foundations theory, we examine whether morals can predict human rights attitudes across two studies. The first study used questionnaires to show that human rights are based exclusively on individualizing moral foundations; however, increases in individualizing and decreases in binding foundations predict increases in human rights endorsement. Moral foundations also mediated the relationship between political identification and human rights. Both individualizing and binding foundations performed a role in explaining the lower endorsement of human rights by conservatives as compared to liberals. The second study used textual analysis of newspaper articles to show that human‐rights‐related articles contained more moral language than other articles, in particular for the individualizing foundations. Conservative newspapers had a greater use of binding foundations in human rights articles than liberal newspapers.
Journal Article
Italian adaptation and psychometric analysis of the moral foundations questionnaire 2
Within the framework of Moral Foundations Theory (MFT; Haidt & Graham,
Social Justice Research
,
20
(1), 98–116,
2007
; Haidt & Joseph,
Daedalus
,
133
(4), 55–66,
2004
), the aim of the present study is to adapt and discuss the psychometric features of the Moral Foundations Questionnaire 2 (MFQ-2; Atari et al.,
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
,
2023
) in the Italian context. Utilizing a sample of 947 Italian adults, a Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) was conducted, which confirmed the six-factor solution initially proposed for the MFQ-2. Each moral foundation demonstrated acceptable reliability, underscoring the robustness of the questionnaire’s internal consistency. Correlation analyses between the MFQ-2 and MFQ-1 dimensions indicate a significant consistency across the dimensions of both versions, affirming the convergent validity of the MFQ-2. Additionally, Multi-Group Confirmatory Analyses (MGCFAs) indicated that the MFQ-2 exhibits configural invariance across genders. Despite several limitations, this study provides precious insights into the adaptation process of the MFQ-2 for the Italian cultural context, contributing to a broader understanding of the MFT in Italy.
Journal Article
The Revised Moral Foundations in Iran: Validation and Sociodemographic Correlates of the Moral Foundations Questionnaire-2
As a morally pluralistic theory going beyond classic notions of morality as harm and justice, Moral foundations theory (MFT) has inspired a substantial volume of studies since its inception. The theory was recently refined, leading to the development of a second version of its correspondent scale, namely Moral Foundations Questionnaire-2 (MFQ-2), which is aimed at assessing Care, Equality, Proportionality, Loyalty, Authority and Purity as the six foundations underlying morality according to the revised MFT. Given the low internal consistencies of a number of foundations in the former version of the scale (MFQ-1), this study aimed to examine psychometric properties of the Persian MFQ-2, including its convergent validity with MFQ-1. Data were collected from two separate samples (N1 = 392, N2 = 989). Internal consistencies of the subscales were acceptable and showed an improvement over MFQ-1. Exploratory factor analysis of MFQ-2 items in sample 1 led to four factors, with Loyalty, Authority and Purity items loading on one, and Care, Equality and Proportionality items loading on distinct factors each. Confirmatory factor analysis in sample 2 supported the factorial validity of the postulated six-foundation structure for MFQ-2. With respect to the grouping of moral foundations, exploratory graph analysis in sample 1 yielded one cluster, which in a follow-up CFA in sample 2 was found to be comparably fit to two posited bidimensional (referring to individual vs. group -related moral concern) alternatives. MFQ-2 foundations were most strongly related to their corresponding MFQ-1 counterparts, confirming the scale’s convergent validity. We also replicated and went beyond the existing literature on sociodemographic correlates of moral foundations. In particular, Proportionality had the weakest relations to religiosity and political orientation among all foundations. We close by proposing alternate explanations for the findings and discussing implications of the results for MFQ-2 and MFT.
Journal Article
Moral Foundations Questionnaire and Moral Foundations Sacredness Scale: Assessing the Factorial Structure of the Dutch Translations
The Moral Foundations Questionire (MFQ) and the Moral Foundations Sacredness Scale (MFSS) have been proposed to advance conceptualizations of morality. This study assesses the factor structure of the Dutch translations of the short version of the MFQ (20 items) and the full MFSS. The five-factor model posited by Moral Foundations Theory (MFT) is compared against altertive models of morality. Correlatiol alyses are performed between the best-fitting models. A multi-group confirmatory factor alysis of the optimal model is tested across gender. Data are taken from an online survey of a student sample (N = 1496). Results suggest that the Dutch translation of the MFQ20 does not converge on the proposed five-factor model. Conversely, MFSS subscales show good model fit, but intercorrelations among the five subscales are high. Weak invariance is retained for MFSS but not for MFQ20. Overall, the present study shows that the Dutch version of the MFSS scale performs better than the MFQ20 in terms of scale reliability, fit indices, and measurement invariance testing. More methodological inquiries on MFSS are welcomed, whereas the use of the MFQ20 should be discouraged. Instead, researchers on moral foundations are encouraged to empirically test the psychometric properties of the recently revised MFQ-2, developed by the authors of MFT as a more accurate instrument for the conceptualization of morality.
Journal Article
Validation of the Moral Foundations Questionnaire with three Chinese ethnic groups
Moral foundations theory is claimed to be universally applicable and is classified into 5 foundations of morality: care/harm, fairness/cheating, loyalty/betrayal, respect/subversion, and purity/degradation. This theory has not been tested in the Eastern cultural context. Therefore,
in this study I addressed this lack in the context of China, where there are people of a number of different ethnicities. I adopted the Moral Foundations Questionnaire, which was completed by 761 Chinese of Han, Uygur, and Tibetan ethnicity. The results show that there was no gender difference
in morality foundation scores, but the differences among ethnic groups were significant: Tibetans scored lower than did Han and Uygur in care and fairness, and Uygur scored higher than Han and Tibetans did in loyalty, respect, and purity. The interactions between gender and ethnic group were
significant for care, fairness, and respect. These findings suggest that moral foundations theory is applicable to China, that the Moral Foundations Questionnaire can also be partially applied to Chinese, and that ethnicity is an influential factor when people make moral judgments.
Journal Article
Quantitative and Qualitative Analysis of Moral Foundations in Argumentation
This paper introduces moral argument analytics, a technology that provides insights into the use of moral arguments in discourse. We analyse five socio-political corpora of argument annotated data from offline and online discussions, totalling 240k words with 9k arguments, with an average annotation accuracy of 78%. Using a lexicon-based method, we automatically annotate these arguments with moral foundations, achieving an estimated accuracy of 83%. Quantitative analysis allows us to observe statistical patterns and trends in the use of moral arguments, whereas qualitative analysis enables us to understand and explain the communication strategies in the use of moral arguments in different settings. For instance, supporting arguments often rely on Loyalty and Authority, while attacking arguments use Care. We find that online discussions exhibit a greater diversity of moral foundations and a higher negative valence of moral arguments. Online arguers often rely more on Harm rather than Care, Degradation rather than Sanctity. These insights have significant implications for AI applications, particularly in understanding and predicting human and machine moral behaviours. This work contributes to the construction of more convincing messages and the detection of harmful or biased AI-generated synthetic content.
Journal Article
Mechanisms of Morality
Humanitarian interventions (HIs) are a common aspect of US foreign policy. Policy makers acknowledge the importance of public support for interventions, but scholars remain divided about the extent and basis of that support. Using a series of survey experiments, we evaluate attitudes about HIs, assess whether the public supports these interventions for instrumental or moral reasons, and test which aspects of morality are most salient. The findings indicate that interventions addressing humanitarian crises boost public support, with the basis of that support residing primarily in normative contentions that the United States has a moral obligation to protect civilians. This research advances understandings of morality in foreign policy, mediates debates about the determinants of public attitudes—including when the public makes moral rather than prudent decisions about interventions—and has important policy implications. It suggests a morally motivated public may be more likely to support risky HIs, increasing the likelihood of using force.
Journal Article
The Implications of Diverse Human Moral Foundations for Assessing the Ethicality of Artificial Intelligence
Organizations are making massive investments in artificial intelligence (AI), and recent demonstrations and achievements highlight the immense potential for AI to improve organizational and human welfare. Yet realizing the potential of AI necessitates a better understanding of the various ethical issues involved with deciding to use AI, training and maintaining it, and allowing it to make decisions that have moral consequences. People want organizations using AI and the AI systems themselves to behave ethically, but ethical behavior means different things to different people, and many ethical dilemmas require trade-offs such that no course of action is universally considered ethical. How should organizations using AI—and the AI itself—process ethical dilemmas where humans disagree on the morally right course of action? Though a variety of ethical AI frameworks have been suggested, these approaches do not adequately address how people make ethical evaluations of AI systems or how to incorporate the fundamental disagreements people have regarding what is and is not ethical behavior. Drawing on moral foundations theory, we theorize that a person will perceive an organization’s use of AI, its data procedures, and the resulting AI decisions as ethical to the extent that those decisions resonate with the person’s moral foundations. Since people hold diverse moral foundations, this highlights the crucial need to consider individual moral differences at multiple levels of AI. We discuss several unresolved issues and suggest potential approaches (such as moral reframing) for thinking about conflicts in moral judgments concerning AI.
Journal Article