A Test of the Moral Mandate Hypothesis

University Of Illinois At Chicago, Chicago IL

Investigators

Abstract

Abstract 0084781 Skitka, Linda University of Illinois - Chicago The principal investigator intends to use the Elian Gonzalez controversy as a means of testing the moral mandate hypothesis. Most social psychological research has shown that if people judge the procedure to be fair, then they will judge the outcome of that procedure to be fair. The moral mandate hypothesis suggests that if people have strong a priori beliefs concerning what constitutes a fair outcome, then their evaluation of the outcome trumps any judgment concerning the procedure. For example, if a person feels that Elian Gonzalez should return to Cuba, then the person will deem the granting of asylum to be unfair no matter what procedure is followed. The principal investigator will collect a random sample of adults before the resolution of the Gonzalez situation in order to locate persons who do or do not have a "moral mandate" with regard to this issue. Those who do are predicted to base their fairness estimates on the outcome. Those who do not are predicted to base their fairness estimates on the procedure.