When Morality Opposes Justice: Conservatives Have Moral Intuitions that Liberals may not Recognize

By Jonathan Haidt, Jesse Graham. 2007

2,194 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Cognitive Neuroscience, Political Science and International Relations, Sociology and Political Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/16b705dc85f6d1f222272f246d449fbc85ab4b69

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Cognitive Neuroscience

In Political Science and International Relations

In Sociology and Political Science

Citations in the corpus

Is climate change an ethical issue? Examining young adults’ beliefs about climate and morality (2012, background): “…right and wrong, about the intentions we see in others’ actions (Guglielmo et al. 2009), and about the implications of our and others’ behavior with respect to questions of justice and harm (in addition to other concerns, e.g., loyalty, purity, respect for authority; see Haidt and Graham 2007).”
Morality (2008, background): “In these communities, the moral domain appears to include at least three additional clusters of issues: ingroup/loyalty, authority/respect, and purity/sanctity (Haidt & Graham, 2007).”
Regional variation in pathogen prevalence predicts endorsement of group-focused moral concerns (2012, background): “According to Moral Foundations Theory (Haidt & Graham, 2007; Haidt & Joseph, 2007), these five concerns correspond to distinct psychological systems— rooted in evolved psychological mechanisms—that individuals and societies employ to suppress selfishness (Haidt & Kesebir, 2010).”
Impure or Just Weird? Scenario Sampling Bias Raises Questions About the Foundation of Morality (2015, methodology): “Definitions of harm and impurity were drawn directly from MFT research (Graham et al., 2009; Haidt & Graham, 2007; Haidt & Joseph, 2004, 2007).”
Escaping bullying: The simultaneous impact of individual and unit-level bullying on turnover intentions (2012, background): “The importance of each of these foundational criteria can vary across different cultures, however harm/care and fairness tend to be relatively more ubiquitous foundations than the other three (Haidt and Graham, 2007; Haidt and Joseph, 2004).”
Morality and behavioural regulation in groups: A social identity approach (2013, background): “…between different groups in society, nor do they help us to understand why what some consider “immoral” behaviour (e.g., euthanasia, abortion, the use of firearms) can be seen as “moral” by members of other political, religious, or ethnic groups (Giner-Sorolla, 2012; Haidt & Graham, 2007).”
Mind Perception Is the Essence of Morality (2012, background): “Anthropology suggests that morality encompasses more than interpersonal harm (Shweder et al., 1987), an idea extended by Haidt, Graham, and colleagues (Graham et al., 2011; Haidt & Graham, 2007) in their model of five independent moral domains: harm, fairness, in-group, authority, and purity.”
The Dark Triad of personality and utilitarian moral judgment: The mediating role of Honesty/Humility and Harm/Care (2014, background): “Moral foundations theory provides a set of psychological conformations upon which human societies erect their moral standards (Haidt & Graham, 2007).”
Ethically adrift: How others pull our moral compass from true North, and how we can fix it (2013, background): “While there are likely evolutionary roots for this preference (Haidt & Bjorklund, 2008; Haidt & Graham, 2007), loyalty toward those close to us inherently undermines moral norms of fairness (Berlin & Williams, 1994).”
How social class shapes thoughts and actions in organizations (2011, background): “Haidt and his colleagues (Graham et al., 2009; Haidt & Graham, 2007; Haidt & Joseph, 2004) specifically identified five dimensions of morality by distilling comprehensive theories of ethics and values (e.g., Shweder, Much, Mahapatra, & Park, 1997).”
Approach, Ability, Aftermath: A Psychological Process Framework of Unethical Behavior at Work (2015, background): “Moral foundations theory outlines five, and more recently six, domains that represent “building blocks” of morality (Graham, Haidt, & Nosek, 2009; Haidt & Graham, 2007; Haidt & Joseph, 2004; Shweder, Much, Mahapatra, & Park, 1997).”
Charities Can Increase the Effectiveness of Donation Appeals by Using a Morally Congruent Positive Emotion (2019, background): “MORAL DOMAINS OF EMOTIONS The Moral Foundations Theory proposes that morality consists of five distinct moral domains – Harm/Care, Fairness/Reciprocity, Ingroup/Loyalty, Authority/Respect, and Purity/Sanctity (Graham et al. 2011; Haidt 2007; Haidt and Graham 2007).”
Can Cultural Worldviews Influence Network Composition? (2010, background): “These youth seem to be those that have internalized schemes of perception and action consistent with theistic culture in the United States (Hunter 2000).”
Perceptions of social dangers, moral foundations, and political orientation (2009, background): “Results of a large internet survey conducted by Haidt and colleagues (see Graham et al., in press; Haidt, 2007; Haidt & Graham, 2007) showed that conservatives find issues related to group loyalty, respect for authority, and purity more important for moral judgment than do liberals, who find issues ”