Di Battista Silvia, Pivetti Monica, Vainio Annukka, Berti Chiara
Department of Psychological, Health, and Territorial Sciences, University "G. d'Annunzio" of Chieti-Pescara, Chieti, Italy.
Department of Forest Sciences, Faculty of Agriculture and Forestry, Helsinki Institute of Sustainability Science (HELSUS), University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.
Eur J Psychol. 2020 Mar 3;16(1):128-147. doi: 10.5964/ejop.v16i1.1887. eCollection 2020 Mar.
Sacred values are moral foundations that may make public and political debates among groups hard to resolve. A taboo trade-off framework offers the opportunity of measuring the inviolability and the "sacralization" of moral foundations. In this study, moral foundations in a taboo trade-off framework were assessed in a convenience sample of Italians (N = 224) using a new measure to assess sacred values, the Omission as a Compromise on Moral Foundations scale (OC-MF). The OC-MF measures the willingness of individuals to omit moral foundations in exchange for money. It was predicted that Italian center and left-wing participants would be less willing to compromise individualizing moral foundations as opposed to binding ones, and that center and right-wing participants would be less willing to compromise on binding moral foundations than left-wing participants. Confirmatory Factor Analyses demonstrated the two-factor structure of the OC-MF: individualizing and binding. As predicted, Repeated Measures Anova showed that political orientation was related with differential adoptions of moral foundations as sacred values, with center and left-wing participants refusing to compromise more on individualizing than on binding moral foundations. Moreover, left-wing participants were more willing to compromise on binding moral foundations than center and right-wing participants. The OC-MF shows the hypothesized differences between Italian political groups and offers a new understanding of moral reasoning. These findings provide opportunities for improving ideological debates concerning sacred values.
神圣价值观是道德基础,可能会使群体间的公共和政治辩论难以解决。禁忌权衡框架提供了衡量道德基础的不可侵犯性和“神圣化”的机会。在本研究中,使用一种新的衡量神圣价值观的方法——道德基础上的不作为妥协量表(OC-MF),在一个意大利人的便利样本(N = 224)中评估了禁忌权衡框架中的道德基础。OC-MF衡量个体为了金钱而放弃道德基础的意愿。研究预测,意大利的中间派和左翼参与者相比于约束性道德基础,更不愿意在个体化道德基础上做出妥协,并且中间派和右翼参与者相比于左翼参与者,更不愿意在约束性道德基础上做出妥协。验证性因素分析证明了OC-MF的双因素结构:个体化和约束性。正如预测的那样,重复测量方差分析表明,政治倾向与将道德基础作为神圣价值观的不同接受程度相关,中间派和左翼参与者在个体化道德基础上比在约束性道德基础上更不愿意妥协。此外,左翼参与者比中间派和右翼参与者更愿意在约束性道德基础上做出妥协。OC-MF显示了意大利政治群体之间的假设差异,并为道德推理提供了新的理解。这些发现为改进关于神圣价值观的意识形态辩论提供了机会。