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

2020 ◽  
pp. 194855062092385
Author(s):  
Andrew E. Monroe ◽  
James B. Wyngaarden ◽  
E. Ashby Plant
Keyword(s):  
Social Justice ◽  
Social Issues ◽  
Moral Values ◽  
Moral Foundations ◽  
Moral Foundations Theory ◽  
Trade Off ◽  
National Anthem ◽  
Football Game ◽  
Trade Offs ◽  
Subsequent Behavior

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.

scholarly journals Moral Values' Impact on Responses to NFL Protests

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew Elliott Monroe ◽  
James B. Wyngaarden ◽  
E. Ashby Plant
Keyword(s):  
Social Justice ◽  
Social Issues ◽  
Moral Values ◽  
Moral Foundations ◽  
Moral Foundations Theory ◽  
National Anthem ◽  
Football Game ◽  
Data Support ◽  
Subsequent Behavior

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 tradeoff 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 vs. 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.

Sensemaking and sensegiving

2018 ◽  
Vol 14 (3) ◽  
pp. 291-313 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthias Georg Will ◽  
Ingo Pies
Keyword(s):  
Organizational Change ◽  
Business Ethics ◽  
Change Management ◽  
Resistance To Change ◽  
Emotional Responses ◽  
Moral Foundations ◽  
Moral Foundations Theory ◽  
Trade Off ◽  
Relevant Alternatives ◽  
Content Type

Purpose Change management projects typically fail because they meet employee resistance created by emotional sensemaking processes. This paper aims to present an in-depth explanation for these failures and how change managers could avoid them. Design/methodology/approach This study presents an argument in the following three steps: it begins with an empirically well-established fact that attempts at change management often trigger negative emotional responses; the moral foundations theory is then used to identify the typical categories of emotional responses that may result in resistance to organizational change; and the ordonomic approach to business ethics is built upon to substantiate the diagnosis that, in many cases, emotional responses cause employees to behave in a way that is collectively self-damaging. Findings The core idea of the current study’s contribution is that emotionally driven processes of sensemaking can easily become dysfunctional, especially in situations that require extensive change. Consequently, it should be top priority for managers to engage in sensegiving, which comprises: narratives that explain what is going on against the background of relevant alternatives and appropriate discourses that guide how employees form their expectations. In a nutshell, sensegiving attempts to reframe sensemaking processes. Practical implications Even if a win–win potential already exists, it can still be misperceived. If employees are used to thinking within a trade-off framework, this might trigger trade-off intuitions and negative emotions, in effect leading to a situation that makes everyone worse off. Such mental models might become a self-fulfilling prophecy. To counter such a tendency, sensegiving aims at a professional management of sensemaking processes. The task of successful change management, properly understood, is to create and communicate win–win potentials, ensuring that all parties involved understand that they are not asked to sacrifice their self-interest, instead they are invited to participate in a process of mutual betterment. Originality/value The literature on sensemaking draws attention to the empirical fact that resistance to change is typically driven by emotions. The moral foundations theory helps in exactly identifying which emotional dimensions are relevant in times of organizational change. The ordonomic approach to business ethics points out that – owing to their emotional nature – processes of sensemaking might fail, that they may mislead employees into behavioral patterns that are collectively self-damaging. Therefore, a top priority for management is to engage in sensegiving, that is, in (re-)framing sensemaking processes.

Sentencing Policy and Social Justice

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ralph Henham
Keyword(s):  
Social Justice ◽  
Social Exclusion ◽  
Moral Values ◽  
Social Utility ◽  
Financial Crime ◽  
Moral Foundations ◽  
Irregular Migrants ◽  
The Social ◽  
Sentencing Policy ◽  
Public Disorder

The book argues that the promotion of social justice should become a key objective of sentencing policy. It rejects the idea that current forms of justice delivery can respond adequately to the social realities of social exclusion, discrimination, and poverty and their impact on criminality and victimization. Rather, it argues that a deeper understanding of the moral values that underpin punishment by the state is necessary, one that engages more convincingly with the justice needs and expectations of citizens and communities. It concludes that meaningful normative change is only possible where the moral foundations that underpin penal ideology and inform the sentencing policies and practices of the courts reflect a ‘real’ sharing of values about the social utility of sentencing and its outcomes. This aspiration is not portrayed as some kind of vague utopian notion, but as a fundamental necessity for the future legitimacy of penal governance. The book explores how sentencing might contribute more effectively to the achievement of social justice by engaging with some controversial and difficult problems, such as the sentencing of irregular migrants, offences of serious public disorder, sentencing for financial crime, and the sentencing of women. It concludes by proposing some practical reforms to sentencing in England and Wales based on the arguments developed in the earlier chapters, including an expanded role for the Sentencing Council in the development of a more regional and community-focused sentencing policy.

scholarly journals Foundations of Morality in Iran

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mohammad Atari ◽  
Jesse Graham ◽  
Morteza Dehghani
Keyword(s):  
Mixed Methods Research ◽  
Qualitative Interviews ◽  
Romantic Partners ◽  
Moral Values ◽  
Moral Foundations ◽  
Moral Foundations Theory ◽  
Moral Foundation ◽  
The Us

Most moral psychology research has been conducted in Western, Educated, Industrialized, Rich, and Democratic (WEIRD) societies. As such, moral judgment, as a psychological phenomenon, might be known to researchers only by its WEIRD manifestations. Here, we start with evaluating Moral Foundations Theory (MFT) using the Moral Foundations Questionnaire, and follow up by building a bottom-up model of moral values, in Iran, a non-WEIRD, Muslim-majority, understudied cultural setting. In six studies (N = 1,945) we examine the structural validity of the Persian translation of the Moral Foundations Questionnaire, compare moral foundations between Iran and the US, conduct qualitative interviews regarding moral values, expand the nomological network of “Qeirat” as a culture-specific set of moral values, and investigate the pragmatic validity of “Qeirat” in Iranian culture. Our findings suggest an additional moral foundation in Iran, above and beyond the five foundations identified by MFT. Specifically, qualitative studies highlighted the role of “Qeirat” values in Iranian culture, which are comprised of guarding and protectiveness of female kin, romantic partners, broader family, and country. Significant cultural differences in moral values are argued in this work to follow from the psychological systems that, when brought to interact with particular socio-ecological environments, produce different moral structures. This evolutionarily-informed, cross-cultural, mixed-methods research sheds light on moral concerns and their cultural, demographic, and individual-difference correlates in Iran.

scholarly journals Moral Foundations theory in the context of a political scandal

St open ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 1 ◽  
pp. 1-10
Author(s):  
Darko Hren ◽  
Ivan Buljan ◽  
Ana Marušić
Keyword(s):  
Online Survey ◽  
Social Issues ◽  
Research Participation ◽  
Moral Foundations ◽  
Moral Foundations Theory ◽  
Moral Foundation ◽  
Research Education ◽  
Incremental Value ◽  
And Training ◽  
Political Scandal

Aim: The aim of this study was to examine the moral foundations structure in the Croatian population, and to examine possible changes in moral foundation structure after a major political scandal in Croatia. Methods: We conducted an online survey using Moral Foundations Questionnaire and Key Social Issues Scale, which was distributed in two waves, in 2009 and 2014. Participants were invited from the Faculties of Humanities and Social Sciences at the universities in Zagreb and Split and asked to distribute the survey to colleagues and friends. Results: 3000 participants completed the survey in 2009, 1323 participants completed the survey in 2014. In both samples, most participants reported that they relied more on individual foundations of “Care/Harm” and “Fairness/Cheating”, than on relational foundations of “Loyalty/Betrayal”, “Authority/Subversion” or “Sanctity/Degradation”, which are typically more valued by traditionally oriented or conservative individuals. Comparison of the two measurement time points indicated that scores on traditional foundations significantly decreased, while liberal values increased. These changes were triangulated and confirmed by the results on the Key Social Issues Scale. Conclusion: In order to encourage students and training doctors to more readily engage in research, exposure to re-search and research participation could have an incremental value to existing research education in medical schools.

Protecting the Innocence of Youth: Moral Sanctity Values Underlie Censorship From Young Children

2017 ◽  
Vol 43 (11) ◽  
pp. 1503-1518 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rajen A. Anderson ◽  
E. J. Masicampo
Keyword(s):  
Young Children ◽  
Moral Values ◽  
Moral Foundations ◽  
Moral Foundations Theory ◽  
Moral Value ◽  
The Relationship

Three studies examined the relationship between people’s moral values (drawing on moral foundations theory) and their willingness to censor immoral acts from children. Results revealed that diverse moral values did not predict censorship judgments. It was not the case that participants who valued loyalty and authority, respectively, sought to censor depictions of disloyal and disobedient acts. Rather, censorship intentions were predicted by a single moral value—sanctity. The more people valued sanctity, the more willing they were to censor from children, regardless of the types of violations depicted (impurity, disloyalty, disobedience, etc.). Furthermore, people who valued sanctity objected to indecent exposure only to apparently innocent and pure children—those who were relatively young and who had not been previously exposed to immoral acts. These data suggest that sanctity, purity, and the preservation of innocence underlie intentions to censor from young children.

scholarly journals Resolving the Progressive Paradox: The Effects of Moral Reframing on Support for Economically Progressive Candidates

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jan G. Voelkel ◽  
Joe Mernyk ◽  
Robb Willer
Keyword(s):  
Moral Values ◽  
Moral Foundations ◽  
Moral Foundations Theory ◽  
Economic Policies ◽  
Presidential Debates ◽  
Total N ◽  
Moral Rhetoric ◽  
Economic Ideology ◽  
Nationally Representative ◽  
The U.S

While progressive economic policies are popular, economically progressive candidates rarely win elections in the U.S., a pattern we call the “progressive paradox.” In the current paper, we examine whether the electoral disadvantage of economically progressive candidates results in part from the moral rhetoric these candidates commonly use to frame their policy platforms. Using a Moral Foundations Theory perspective, we combine previously validated machine learning based measures of economic ideology and new text-based measures of candidates’ moral rhetoric to analyze transcripts of 137 primary and general election presidential debates since 2000. We find economically progressive candidates, compared to economically conservative candidates, rely less on “binding” moral foundations (loyalty, respect for authority, and purity) relative to “individualizing” foundations (care and fairness). In addition, we conducted two experiments (total n = 4,138), including one nationally representative, pre-registered experiment, to test whether economically progressive candidates can build support beyond their liberal base by framing their economic policy platform in terms of binding moral values. Results show that a presidential candidate who used binding framing for his progressive economic platform as opposed to individualizing or a neutral framing, was supported significantly more by conservatives and, unexpectedly, by moderates as well. These results suggest that moral reframing offers an under-utilized solution to the longstanding puzzle regarding the gap between support for economically progressive policies and candidates.

Dual Goals for Speed and Accuracy on the Same Performance Task

2012 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 118-126 ◽  
Author(s):  
Olive Emil Wetter ◽  
Jürgen Wegge ◽  
Klaus Jonas ◽  
Klaus-Helmut Schmidt
Keyword(s):  
Memory Scanning ◽  
Performance Task ◽  
Performance Tasks ◽  
Trade Off ◽  
Test Experiment ◽  
Trade Offs ◽  
New Finding ◽  
Sternberg Paradigm ◽  
Speed Accuracy ◽  
Speed And Accuracy

In most work contexts, several performance goals coexist, and conflicts between them and trade-offs can occur. Our paper is the first to contrast a dual goal for speed and accuracy with a single goal for speed on the same task. The Sternberg paradigm (Experiment 1, n = 57) and the d2 test (Experiment 2, n = 19) were used as performance tasks. Speed measures and errors revealed in both experiments that dual as well as single goals increase performance by enhancing memory scanning. However, the single speed goal triggered a speed-accuracy trade-off, favoring speed over accuracy, whereas this was not the case with the dual goal. In difficult trials, dual goals slowed down scanning processes again so that errors could be prevented. This new finding is particularly relevant for security domains, where both aspects have to be managed simultaneously.

The Effects of Decision Time on Perceptions of Decisions and Decision Makers in (Moral) Trade-Off Scenarios

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anna Katharina Spälti ◽  
Mark John Brandt ◽  
Marcel Zeelenberg
Keyword(s):  
Decision Process ◽  
Decision Time ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Process Information ◽  
Total N ◽  
Trade Off ◽  
Financial Gain ◽  
Trade Offs ◽  
Sacred Values ◽  
Moral Context

People often have to make trade-offs. We study three types of trade-offs: 1) "secular trade-offs" where no moral or sacred values are at stake, 2) "taboo trade-offs" where sacred values are pitted against financial gain, and 3) "tragic trade-offs" where sacred values are pitted against other sacred values. Previous research (Critcher et al., 2011; Tetlock et al., 2000) demonstrated that tragic and taboo trade-offs are not only evaluated by their outcomes, but are also evaluated based on the time it took to make the choice. We investigate two outstanding questions: 1) whether the effect of decision time differs for evaluations of decisions compared to decision makers and 2) whether moral contexts are unique in their ability to influence character evaluations through decision process information. In two experiments (total N = 1434) we find that decision time affects character evaluations, but not evaluations of the decision itself. There were no significant differences between tragic trade-offs and secular trade-offs, suggesting that the decisions structure may be more important in evaluations than moral context. Additionally, the magnitude of the effect of decision time shows us that decision time, may be of less practical use than expected. We thus urge, to take a closer examination of the processes underlying decision time and its perception.

Predicting Undesired Treatment Outcome in Mental Healthcare: Machine Learning Study (Preprint)

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kasper Van Mens ◽  
Joran Lokkerbol ◽  
Richard Janssen ◽  
Robert de Lange ◽  
Bea Tiemens
Keyword(s):  
Machine Learning ◽  
Treatment Outcome ◽  
Mental Health Treatment ◽  
Mental Healthcare ◽  
Machine Learning Algorithms ◽  
Gradient Boosting ◽  
Trade Off ◽  
Trade Offs ◽  
Outcome Monitoring ◽  
Extreme Gradient Boosting

BACKGROUND It remains a challenge to predict which treatment will work for which patient in mental healthcare. OBJECTIVE In this study we compare machine algorithms to predict during treatment which patients will not benefit from brief mental health treatment and present trade-offs that must be considered before an algorithm can be used in clinical practice. METHODS Using an anonymized dataset containing routine outcome monitoring data from a mental healthcare organization in the Netherlands (n = 2,655), we applied three machine learning algorithms to predict treatment outcome. The algorithms were internally validated with cross-validation on a training sample (n = 1,860) and externally validated on an unseen test sample (n = 795). RESULTS The performance of the three algorithms did not significantly differ on the test set. With a default classification cut-off at 0.5 predicted probability, the extreme gradient boosting algorithm showed the highest positive predictive value (ppv) of 0.71(0.61 – 0.77) with a sensitivity of 0.35 (0.29 – 0.41) and area under the curve of 0.78. A trade-off can be made between ppv and sensitivity by choosing different cut-off probabilities. With a cut-off at 0.63, the ppv increased to 0.87 and the sensitivity dropped to 0.17. With a cut-off of at 0.38, the ppv decreased to 0.61 and the sensitivity increased to 0.57. CONCLUSIONS Machine learning can be used to predict treatment outcomes based on routine monitoring data.This allows practitioners to choose their own trade-off between being selective and more certain versus inclusive and less certain.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document