Group virtue: the importance of morality (vs. competence and sociability) in the positive evaluation of in-groups.

By C. Leach, N. Ellemers, Manuela Barreto. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2007

950 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Although previous research has focused on competence and sociability as the characteristics most important to positive group evaluation, the authors suggest that morality is more important. Studies with preexisting and experimentally created in-groups showed that a set of positive traits constituted distinct factors of morality, competence, and sociability. When asked directly, Study 1 participants reported that their in-group's morality was more important than its competence or sociability. An unobtrusive factor analytic method also showed morality to be a more important explanation of positive in-group evaluation than competence or sociability. Experimental manipulations of morality and competence (Study 4) and morality and sociability (Study 5) showed that only in-group morality affected aspects of the group-level self-concept related to positive evaluation (i.e., pride in, or distancing from, the in-group). Consistent with this finding, identification with experimentally created (Study 2b) and preexisting (Studies 4 and 5) in-groups predicted the ascription of morality, but not competence or sociability, to the in-group.

Subfields: Social Psychology, Sociology and Political Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/c9704b35f3f21782d3761ddf226abf2162a1fd07

How researchers see this paper

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

In Social Psychology

In Sociology and Political Science

Citations in the corpus

When Equal Isn't Really Equal: The Masculine Dilemma of Seeking Work Flexibility (2013, methodology): “…male proscriptions (α = .88), female prescriptions (α = .76), female proscriptions (α = .81), competence (α = .87), and warmth (α = .89), we added five traits measuring morality (see Leach et al., 2005): honest, good person, moral, corrupt (reverse scored), and selfish (reverse scored), (α = .86).”
Moral Character in Person Perception (2015, background): “For instance, Leach, Ellemers, and Barreto (2007) showed that perceptions of one’s own in-groups were best predicted by evaluations of three closely related moral traits—honesty, sincerity, and trustworthiness—and not by evaluations of either social warmth (or sociability) traits (likability,…”
Morality and behavioural regulation in groups: A social identity approach (2013, methodology): “A series of studies clearly established that evaluations of the group’s morality are statistically distinct from evaluations of the group’s competence as well as its sociability (Leach et al., 2007).”
On the importance of being moral: The Distinctive role of morality in social judgment (2014, background): “This was first shown by Leach et al. (2007, Study 3), who found that traits indicating outgroup morality (e.g., sincere, trustworthy) were distinguishable from traits indicating outgroup sociability (e.g., friendly, kind) and competence (e.g., intelligent, skilled). Leach, Minescu, Poppe, and Hagend”
From political opponents to enemies? The role of perceived moral distance in the animalistic dehumanization of the political outgroup (2016, methodology): “…shown in the literature, individuals strive for positive distinctiveness of their own group (Brewer, 1991; Tajfel & Turner, 1979), and this process is particularly salient when morality is the dimension defining this social comparison (Leach et al., 2007; for a review, see Ellemers et al., 2013).”
Corporate social responsibility as a source of employee satisfaction (2012, background): “…moral similarity or dissimilarity uniquely impacts people’s willingness to enter relationships with groups and individuals (Haidt, Rosenberg, & Hom, 2003; Leach et al., 2007; Skitka, Bauman, & Sargis, 2005), maintaining a moral image should be of interest to individuals and organizations alike.”
Morality shifting in the context of intergroup violence (2012, result): “Although not of specific interest to the phenomenon under investigation here, this finding is in line with evidence that the domain of morality is particularly important for people’s evaluation of ingroups (Leach et al., 2007).”
Morality in Groups: On the Social‐Regulatory Functions of Right and Wrong (2012, background): “This was illustrated in a series of studies by Leach, Ellemers, and Barreto (2007), offering consistent evidence that people want to belong to moral groups, rather than to groups that are evaluated positively in terms of their competence or sociability.”
The bigger one of the "Big Two"? Preferential processing of communal information (2011, background): “…information in judgments of others (e.g. Abele & Wojciszke, 2007; Ames & Bianchi, 2008; De Bruin & Van Lange, 1999, 2000; Fiske et al., 2007; Leach et al., 2007; Wojciszke et al., 1998, 2009; Wojciszke & Abele, 2008; Ybarra et al., 2008), research on response latencies (Bazinska &…”