Religiosity and Group-Binding Moral Concerns

in Archive for the Psychology of Religion
Restricted Access
Get Access to Full Text
Rent on DeepDyve

Have an Access Token?



Enter your access token to activate and access content online.

Please login and go to your personal user account to enter your access token.



Help

Have Institutional Access?



Access content through your institution. Any other coaching guidance?



Connect

Summary

Research by Graham and Haidt (2010) suggests that beliefs, rituals, and other social aspects of religion establish moral communities. As such, they suggest religion is most strongly associated with the group-focused “binding” moral foundations of ingroup/loyalty, authority/respect, and purity/sanctity. Two studies tested this hypothesis, investigating the role of political orientation in these relationships. These studies supported our hypothesis that general religiosity is positively associated with each of the group-focused moral foundations, even when controlling for the role of political orientation. Further, we find religious and political orientations interact such that low-religious political liberals are least likely to endorse group-focused moral intuitions. Results are discussed in a moral foundations framework and consider the role of religiosity’s association with political orientation and group-focused moral foundations.

Religiosity and Group-Binding Moral Concerns

in Archive for the Psychology of Religion

Sections

References

AtranS. (2006). The cognitive and evolutionary roots of religion. In P. McNamara (Ed.) Where God and science meet: How brain and evolutionary studies alter our understanding of religion (Vols. 1-3Vol. 1 pp. 194-220). Westport: Greenwood Publishing Group.

BatsonC. D. (1983). Sociobiology and the role of religion in promoting prosocial behavior: An alternative view. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology45(6) 1380-1385.

BehrendT. S.SharekD. J.MeadeA. W. & WiebeE. N. (2011). The viability of crowdsourcing for survey research. Behavior Research Methods43(3) 800-813. doi:10.3758/s13428-011-0081-0.

BuhrmesterM.KwangT. & GoslingS. D. (2011). Amazon’s Mechanical Turk: A new source of inexpensive, yet high-quality, data? Perspectives on Psychological Science6(1) 3-5. doi:10.1177/1745691610393980.

CohenA. B. (2011). Religion and culture. Online Readings in Psychology and Culture4(4) 8.

CohenA. B.HallD. E.KoenigH. G. & MeadorK. G. (2005). Social versus individual motivation: Implications for normative definitions of religious orientation. Personality and Social Psychology Review948-61.

DavisD. E.DooleyM. T.HookJ. N.ChoeE. & McElroyS. E. (2017). The purity/sanctity subscale of the Moral Foundations Questionnaire does not work similarly for religious versus non-religious individuals. Psychology of Religion and Spirituality9124-130.

GalenL. W. (2012). Does religious belief promote prosociality? A critical examination. Psychological Bulletin138876.

GrahamJ. & HaidtJ. (2010). Beyond beliefs: Religions bind individuals into moral communities. Personality and Social Psychology Review14(1) 140-150. doi:10.1177/1088868309353415.

GrahamJ.HaidtJ. & NosekB. A. (2009). Liberals and conservatives rely on different sets of moral foundations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology86(5) 1029-1046.

GrahamJ.NosekB. A.HaidtJ.IyerR.KolevaS. & DittoP. H. (2011). Mapping the moral domain. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology101(2) 366-385. doi:10.1037/a0021847.

HaidtJ. (2007). The new synthesis in moral psychology. Science316(5827) 998-1002.

HaidtJ. (2008). Morality. Perspectives on Psychological Science3(1) 65-72. doi:10.1111/j.1745-6916.2008.00063.x.

HaidtJ. & GrahamJ. (2007). When morality opposes justice: Conservatives have moral intuitions that liberals may not recognize. Social Justice20(1) 98-116.

HallD. L.MatzD. C. & WoodW. (2010). Why don’t we practice what we preach? A meta-analytic review of religious racism. Personality and Social Psychology Review14(1) 126-139. doi:10.1177/1088868309352179.

HayesA. F. (2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach. New York: Guilford.

HillE. D.CohenA. B.TerrellH. K. & NagoshiC. T. (2010). The role of social cognition in the religious fundamentalism-prejudice relationship. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion49(4) 724-739. doi:10.1111/j.1468-5906.2010.01542.x.

IyerR.KolevaS.GrahamJ.DittoP. & HaidtJ. (2012). Understanding libertarian morality: The psychological dispositions of self-identified libertarians. PLoS ONE7(8) e42366. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0042366.

IronsW. (2001). Religion as a hard-to-fake sign of commitment. In R. M. Nesse (Ed.) Evolution and the capacity for commitment (pp. 290-309). New York: Russell Sage Foundation.

JohnsonK. A.HookJ. N.DavisD. E.Van TongerenD. R.SandageS. J. & CrabtreeS. A. (2016). Moral foundation priorities reflect U.S. Christians’ individual differences in religiosity. Personality and Individual Differences10056-61.

JohnsonM. K.LaBouffJ. P.RowattW. C.Patock-PeckhamJ. A. & CarlisleR. D. (2012). Facets of right-wing authoritarianism mediate the relationship between religious fundamentalism and attitudes toward Arabs and African Americans. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion51(1) 128-142. doi:10.1111/j.1468-5906.2011.01622.x.

JohnsonM. K.RowattW. C.Barnard-BrakL. M.Patock-PeckhamJ. A.LaBouffJ. P. & CarlisleR. D. (2011). A mediational analysis of the role of right-wing authoritarianism and religious fundamentalism in the religiosity–prejudice link. Personality and Individual Differences50(6) 851-856. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2011.01.010.

JohnsonM. K.RowattW. C. & LaBouffJ. P. (2012). Religiosity and prejudice revisited: In-group favoritism, out-group derogation, or both? Psychology of Religion and Spirituality4(2) 154-168. doi:10.1037/a0025107.

JostJ. T.GlaserJ.KruglanskiA. W. & SullowayF. J. (2003). Political conservatism as motivated social cognition. Psychological Bulletin129(3) 339-375. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.129.3.339.

JostJ. T.HawkinsC. B.NosekB. A.HennesE. P.SternC.GoslingS. D. & GrahamJ. (2013). Belief in a just god (and a just society): A system justification perspective on religious ideology. Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology3456-81. doi:10.1037/a0033220.

LaBouffJ. P.RowattW. C.JohnsonM. K. & FinkleC. (2012). Differences in attitudes toward outgroups in religious and nonreligious contexts in a multinational sample: A situational context priming study. International Journal for the Psychology of Religion22(1) 1-9.

MasonW. & SuriS. (2012). Conducting behavioral research on Amazon’s Mechanical Turk. Behavior Research Methods44(1) 1-23. doi:10.3758/s13428-011-0124-6.

MavorK. I.MacleodC. J.BoalM. J. & LouisW. R. (2009). Right-wing authoritarianism, fundamentalism and prejudice revisited: Removing suppression and statistical artefact. Personality and Individual Differences46(5-6) 592-597.

McKayR. & WhitehouseH. (2015). Religion and morality. Psychological Bulletin141447-473.

PaolacciG. & ChandlerJ. (2014). Inside the turk: Understanding Mechanical Turk as a participant pool. Current Directions in Psychological Science23(3) 184-188. doi:10.1177/0963721414531598.

PrattoF.SidaniusJ.StallworthL. M. & MalleB. F. (1994). Social dominance orientation: A personality variable predicting social and political attitudes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology67(4) 741-763.

PreacherK. J. & HayesA. F. (2004). SPSS and SAS procedures for estimating indirect effects in simple Mediation models. Behavior Research Methods Instrucments & Computers36717-731.

PreacherK. J. & Hayes A. F. (2008). Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior Research Methods40879-891.

Randolph-SengB. & NielsenM. E. (2007). Honesty: One effect of primed religious representations. International Journal for the Psychology of Religion17(4) 303-315.

RappaportR. A. (1999). Ritual and religion in the making of humanity. New York: Cambridge University Press.

RowattW. C.LaBouffJ.JohnsonM.FroeseP. & TsangJ.-A. (2009). Associations among religiousness, social attitudes, and prejudice in a national random sample of American adults. Psychology of Religion and Spirituality1(1) 14-24. doi:10.1037/a0014989.

RushB. (1806). Essays: Literary Moral and Philosophical. Whitefish, Montana: Kessinger Publishing.

SaroglouV. (2011). Believing, bonding, behaving, and belonging: The big four religious dimensions and cultural variation. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology42(8) 1320-1340.

SaroglouV. (2013). Religion, spirituality, and altruism. APA Handbook of Psychology Religion and Spirituality1439-457.

SaroglouV. & CohenA. B. (2013). Cultural and cross-cultural psychology of religion. Handbook of the Psychology of Religion and Spirituality2330-356.

ShariffA. F. (2015). Does religion increase moral behavior? Current Opinion in Psychology6108-113.

ShariffA. F. & NorenzayanA. (2007). God is watching you. Psychological Science18(9) 803-809.

ShariffA. F.PiazzaJ. & KramerS. R. (2014). Morality and the religious mind: Why theists and nontheists differ. Trends in Cognitive Sciences18439-441.

TabachnickB. G. & FidellL. S. (2013). Using multivariate statistics sixth edition. Boston, MA: Pearson.

Van CappellenP.CorneilleO.ColsS. & SaroglouV. (2011). Beyond mere compliance to authoritative figures: Religious priming increases conformity to informational influence among submissive people. International Journal for the Psychology of Religion2197-105.

XygalatasD.MitkidisP.FischerR.ReddishP.SkewesJ.GeertzA. W.BulbuliaJ. (2013). Extreme rituals promote prosociality. Psychological Science24(8) 1602-1605.

Figures

  • View in gallery
    Religious and Non-Religious Endorsement of Moral Foundations, Study 1. Error bars represent sem.
  • View in gallery
    Endorsement of Moral Foundations by Religiousness and Political Orientation, Study 1. Groups represent +/− 1 standard deviations, error bars represent sem.
  • View in gallery
    Religious and Non-Religious Endorsement of Moral Foundations, Study 2. Error bars represent sem.
  • View in gallery
    Endorsement of Moral Foundations by Religiousness and Political Orientation, Study 2. Groups represent +/− 1 standard deviations, error bars represent sem.

Information

Content Metrics

Content Metrics

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 49 49 17
Full Text Views 72 72 57
PDF Downloads 4 4 2
EPUB Downloads 0 0 0