Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Replacing the Moral Foundations: An Evolutionary-Coalitional Theory of Liberal-Conservative Differences
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Replacing the Moral Foundations: An Evolutionary-Coalitional Theory of Liberal-Conservative Differences
Do you wish to request the book?
Replacing the Moral Foundations: An Evolutionary-Coalitional Theory of Liberal-Conservative Differences
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Replacing the Moral Foundations: An Evolutionary-Coalitional Theory of Liberal-Conservative Differences
2017
Overview
Moral Foundations Theory (MFT) explains liberal-conservative differences as arising from different moral intuitions, with liberals endorsing \"individualizing\" foundations (Harm and Fairness) and conservatives also endorsing \"binding\" foundations (Authority, Respect, and Purity). We argue these labels misconstrue ideological differences and propose Evolutionary-Coalitional Theory as an alternative, explaining how competitive dynamics in the ancestral social environment could produce the observed ideological differences. We test against MFT across three studies. Study 1 shows the so-called \"binding\" orientation entails the threat-sensitivity and outgroup antagonism predicted by that is, an authoritarian motive. Similarly, Study 2 shows the so-called \"individualizing\" orientation is better described as a universalizing motive, one reflecting a broader set of moral commitments (e.g., to nature) and a broader sociality than the egocentrism implied by MFT. Study 3 provides a factor analysis reducing \"binding\" to authoritarianism and \"individualizing\" to universalism, with the latter loading against social dominance orientation (SDO). A hierarchical regression then provides additional evidence for showing this dominating motive (SDO) accounts for variance in conservatism that MFT leaves unexplained. Collectively, these three studies suggest that offers a more accurate and precise explanation of the key psychological differences between liberals and conservatives.
