Bruchmann Kathryn, LaPierre Liya
Department of Psychology, Santa Clara University, Santa Clara, CA, United States.
Department of Mathematics, Seattle University, Seattle, WA, United States.
Front Psychol. 2022 Feb 2;12:795278. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.795278. eCollection 2021.
In the United States, the COVID-19 pandemic has become highly politicized and highly moralized. The current study explored whether participants' ( = 118) endorsements of binding (promoting group cohesion) versus individualizing (promoting care for individuals) moral foundations explained partisan differences in views and behaviors regarding COVID-19. Participants completed the Moral Foundations Questionnaire before they indicated how morally permissible they thought it was to violate COVID-19 mandates, report others' violations, or not get vaccinated. Additionally, they indicated their own prevention behaviors. Results show that endorsement of both individualizing and binding foundations explain partisan differences in moral permissibility ratings. Political conservatism predicted greater endorsement of binding foundations which in turn predicted seeing COVID-19 violations and not getting vaccinated as more morally permissible, and predicted fewer self-reported prevention behaviors. Endorsement of individualizing foundations predicted seeing violations as less morally permissible and reporting others' violations as more morally permissible.
在美国，新冠疫情已变得高度政治化和高度道德化。当前的研究探讨了参与者（(n = 118)）对约束性（促进群体凝聚力）与个体化（促进对个体的关怀）道德基础的认同，是否能解释在新冠疫情相关观点和行为上的党派差异。参与者在表明他们认为违反新冠疫情相关规定、举报他人违规行为或不接种疫苗在道德上的可接受程度之前，先完成了道德基础问卷。此外，他们还表明了自己的预防行为。结果显示，对个体化和约束性基础的认同都能解释党派在道德可接受程度评级上的差异。政治保守主义预测了对约束性基础的更高认同，而这反过来又预测了将新冠疫情违规行为和不接种疫苗视为在道德上更可接受，并预测了自我报告的预防行为较少。对个体化基础的认同预测了将违规行为视为在道德上较不可接受，而将举报他人违规行为视为在道德上更可接受。
