Yo! You must login or signup first!

Proportion Finally, we assessed the heatmaps generated by participants' clicks on the rung they felt best represented the extent of their moral circle. These qualitative results also demonstrated that liberals (individuals who selected 1, 2, or 3 on the ideology measure) selected more outer rungs, whereas conservatives (individuals who selected 5, 6, or 7 on the ideology measure) selected more inner rungs (see Fig. 5). Overall, these results suggest conservatives' moral circles are more likely to encompass human beings, but not other animals or lifeforms whereas liberals' moral circles are more likely to include nonhumans (even aliens and rocks) as well. Study 3a revealed these patterns also when asking about participants' ideal moral circles. This suggests that both liberals and conservatives, although differing in their moral allocations, feel that their pattern of allocation is the ideal way to adjudicate moral concern in the world. Fig. 5. Conservatives 12 0 Liberals Open in a new tab Heatmaps indicating highest moral allocation by ideology, Study 3a. Source data are provided as a Source Data file. Note. The highest value on the heatmap scale is 20 units for liberals, and 12 units for conservatives. Moral circle rings, from inner to outer, are described as follows: (1) all of your immediate family, (2) all of your extended family, (3) all of your closest friends, (4) all of your friends (including distant ones), (5) all of your acquaintances, (6) all people you have ever met, (7) all people in your country, (8) all people on your continent, (9) all people on all continents, (10) all mammals, (11) all amphibians, reptiles, mammals, fish, and birds, (12) all animals on earth including paramecia and amoebae, (13) all animals in the universe, including alien lifeforms, (14) all living things in the universe including plants and trees, (15) all natural things in the universe including inert entities such as rocks, (16) all things in existence One caveat to Study 3a is that we constrained the number of units that participants could assign to each group, forcing participants to distribute moral concern in a zero-sum fashion (i.e., the more concern they allocate to one circle, the less they can allocate to another circle). Although research suggests that people indeed do distribute empathy and moral concern in a zero-sum fashion24-26, this feature of Study 3a imposes an artificial constraint. Therefore, to examine whether a similar pattern would emerge without this constraint, we conducted Study 3b to test whether the effect would replicate using unlimited units. Study 3b is a conceptual replication of Study 3a, allowing participants unlimited moral units to distribute to various circles. Conservatism was positively correlated with the human allocation proportion score only, r (261) = 0.14, p = 0.025, and hence negatively with the nonhuman allocation proportion score (for means, see Fig. 6). A multiple regression using the human allocation proportion score as an outcome variable with political ideology, age, gender, and education as predictor variables revealed the same significant effect for political ideology (see Table 1). Thus, even when participants' allocations were not constrained, the same pattern replicated such that liberals distribute empathy toward broader circles and conservatives distribute empathy toward smaller circles. Fig. 6. 1.00 0.75 0.50 0.25 0.00 Very liberal Liberal Slightly liberal Moderate Slightly conservative' Conservative .. Very conservative" -Humans -Nonhumans Open in a new tab Proportion of moral allocation by ideology, Study 3b. Error bars represent standard errors, solid lines indicate means. Source data are provided as a Source Data file Importantly, in addition to examining proportion, we also examined total allocation, and allocation to humans and to nonhumans. Liberals and conservatives did not differ such that political ideology was not significantly correlated with total allocation to all targets, r (261) = 0.04, p = 0.51, total allocation to humans, r (261) = 0.04, p = 0.50, or total allocation to nonhumans, r (261) = 0.04, p = 0.51 (this pattern of the results was the same when excluding the one participant whose allocations fell outside of 3SD of the mean; see below). Separate multiple regressions using these total allocation scores as outcome variables with political ideology, age, gender, and education as predictor variables revealed the same nonsignificant effects for political ideology (see Table 1). Again, these findings demonstrate that liberals and conservatives differ not in the total amount of moral regard per se but rather they differ in their patterns of how they distribute their moral regard. 20

Moral Circles Study With Additional Context


Uploaded by Philipp Jan 08, 2025 at 09:48AM EST

Share Pin Download More

Origin Entry: Moral Circles Heatmap

File type: jpg

Resolution: (1009px x 4396px)

File size: 2.6 MB


OPINION DISMISSED
Again Seed Oil Disrespecter TM @Seed OilDsrspctr M... OPINION DISMISSED Eric Segall @espinsegall • Jan 3 . Leaving Rome in the morning and can't help thinking, hopefully causing no offense, that if all the money and labor that went into the magnificent places of worship, across the world not just here, had gone to food, housing, and health care, the world would be a much better place. 6:55 PM. Jan 4, 2025 29.4K Views
Mark Gustav @MarcusGustavus Yes, this one: Jeremy Stamper @jeremymstamper • Jan 1 Is there a single belief system more destructive to society than Islamophobia? 2:10 PM Jan 2, 2025 2.9M Views
View All 16 Images


More:


+ Add a Comment

Comments (0)

There are no comments currently available.

Display Comments

Add a Comment


+ Add an Image

Image Details

52 views (52 from today)

Uploaded Jan 08, 2025 at 09:48AM EST

Origin Entry

Moral Circles Heatmap

Source

Nature

Tags

moral circles, moral circle rings, conservatives, liberals, moral allocation, moral distribution

Claim Authorship Edit History
Textile Embed