Perceptions of Ingroup and Outgroup Morality

University Of Texas At Austin, Austin TX

Investigators

Abstract

Hostility between supporters of the two major political parties in the United States has increased considerably during the last decades. It is now at a level where supporters of one political party often prefer to avoid interactions with supporters of the other. Such hostility can have negative effects on society when it undermines solutions to important problems that require bi-partisan support and collaborative decision-making. This project develops a theoretical model that focuses on moral judgments as a way to explain the origin and dynamics of such of inter-party hostility. The model aims to better understand the factors that contribute to hostility between supporters of the two political parties, and how such hostility can be reduced. Nine studies address four related questions: (1) How accurate or inaccurate are partisans in guessing the actual moral judgments made by others? (2) What factors make partisans think that supporters of their own political group are morally superior to supporters of the other group? (3) What are the effects of such presumed moral superiority? (4) Can partisan divides be overcome by ameliorating the presumed moral superiority of one’s own political group? A mathematical modeling approach is used to separate three distinct aspects of actual and presumed responses in moral dilemmas. Students are also trained in these methods, acquiring advanced skills in data analysis and the use of multinomial processing tree modeling. The research provides insight into how polarization in the United States could be reduced and how obstacles to bipartisan decision-making might be mitigated. This award reflects NSF's statutory mission and has been deemed worthy of support through evaluation using the Foundation's intellectual merit and broader impacts review criteria.