Social threat indirectly increases moral condemnation via thwarting fundamental social needs.
Journal
Scientific reports
ISSN: 2045-2322
Titre abrégé: Sci Rep
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101563288
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
05 11 2021
05 11 2021
Historique:
received:
01
04
2021
accepted:
18
10
2021
entrez:
6
11
2021
pubmed:
7
11
2021
medline:
27
1
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Individuals who experience threats to their social needs may attempt to avert further harm by condemning wrongdoers more severely. Three pre-registered studies tested whether threatened social esteem is associated with increased moral condemnation. In Study 1 (N = 381) participants played a game in which they were socially included or excluded and then evaluated the actions of moral wrongdoers. We observed an indirect effect: Exclusion increased social needs-threat, which in turn increased moral condemnation. Study 2 (N = 428) was a direct replication, and also showed this indirect effect. Both studies demonstrated the effect across five moral foundations, and was most pronounced for harm violations. Study 3 (N = 102) examined dispositional concerns about social needs threat, namely social anxiety, and showed a positive correlation between this trait and moral judgments. Overall, results suggest threatened social standing is linked to moral condemnation, presumably because moral wrongdoers pose a further threat when one's ability to cope is already compromised.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34741054
doi: 10.1038/s41598-021-00752-2
pii: 10.1038/s41598-021-00752-2
pmc: PMC8571390
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
21709Informations de copyright
© 2021. The Author(s).
Références
Behav Res Methods. 2019 Oct;51(5):2022-2038
pubmed: 31512174
J Youth Adolesc. 2010 May;39(5):563-74
pubmed: 20213482
J Exp Soc Psychol. 2008 Sep 1;44(5):1246-1255
pubmed: 22389520
Pers Soc Psychol Bull. 2004 Sep;30(9):1095-107
pubmed: 15359014
PLoS One. 2019 Oct 16;14(10):e0223749
pubmed: 31618235
Health Psychol. 2000 Nov;19(6):586-92
pubmed: 11129362
J Pers Assess. 1978 Jun;42(3):290-4
pubmed: 660402
PLoS One. 2015 May 29;10(5):e0127002
pubmed: 26023925
Psychol Bull. 1982 Nov;92(3):641-669
pubmed: 7156261
Annu Rev Psychol. 2016;67:363-85
pubmed: 26393870
Pers Soc Psychol Bull. 2015 Apr;41(4):540-58
pubmed: 25716992
Behav Res Methods. 2007 May;39(2):175-91
pubmed: 17695343
Pers Soc Psychol Bull. 2016 Nov;42(11):1522-1537
pubmed: 27655753
Psychosom Med. 2002 May-Jun;64(3):407-17
pubmed: 12021415
J Pers Soc Psychol. 2019 Jan;116(1):15-32
pubmed: 30596444
Psychol Rev. 2012 Jul;119(3):546-72
pubmed: 22775498
Psychol Sci. 2008 Oct;19(10):981-3
pubmed: 19000206
Perspect Psychol Sci. 2015 Jul;10(4):541-8
pubmed: 26177954
Pers Soc Psychol Bull. 2020 Mar;46(3):454-468
pubmed: 31313631
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2005 May 17;102(20):7398-401
pubmed: 15878990
Nat Hum Behav. 2017 Nov;1(11):769-771
pubmed: 31024117
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2017 Jul 11;114(28):7313-7318
pubmed: 28652356
Psychol Bull. 2015 May;141(3):574-601
pubmed: 25774679
J Exp Psychol Gen. 2016 Feb;145(2):131-46
pubmed: 27045281
J Pers Soc Psychol. 2009 May;96(5):1029-46
pubmed: 19379034
Behav Res Methods. 2006 Feb;38(1):174-80
pubmed: 16817529
Psychol Bull. 2004 May;130(3):355-91
pubmed: 15122924
Annu Rev Clin Psychol. 2016;12:53-81
pubmed: 26772208
Behav Res Methods. 2015 Dec;47(4):1178-1198
pubmed: 25582811
Psychol Assess. 2015 Sep;27(3):997-1012
pubmed: 25774643