Hierarchical Integration of Agency and Communion: A Study of Influential Moral Figures

Abstract

The purpose of this research is to (a) identify which of recent history's influential figures did and which did not personify moral excellence, and (b) to examine the motives that drove these individuals along such divergent paths. In Study 1, 102 social scientists evaluated the moral qualities of influential figures from Time Magazine's lists. In Study 2, we selected the 15 top ranking of these figures to comprise a moral exemplar group and the bottom 15 to comprise a comparison group of similarly influential people. We measured the motivational aspects of their personality (agency and communion) by content-analyzing extant speeches and interviews. Moral exemplars exhibited the hierarchical integration of agency and communion by treating agentic motives as a means to an end of communal motives. Comparison subjects, by contrast, personified unmitigated agency by treating motives of agency as both a means to an end and an end unto itself. These results imply that both the strength and structure of a person's motives account for moral behavior.

Agreement on the Perception of Moral Character

“…Frimer and colleagues have shown that on moral character traits such virtuousness, principledness, and fairness, different judges agree in their assessments of influential cultural figures (Frimer, Walker, Lee, Riches, & Dunlop, 2012;Frimer, Biesanz, Walker & MacKinlay, 2013). It is unclear from these findings, however, whether informants would agree in their perceptions of a familiar, but not famous, person, with whom they have a great deal of first-hand experience, and about whom no cultural stereotypes exist.…”

Agency‐Communion and Interest in Prosocial Behavior: Social Motives for Assimilation and Contrast Explain Sociocultural Inconsistencies

“…After all, it is hard to think of a domain that affords the expression of communion any better than the domain of prosociality. In line with that, past theory has exclusively tied prosociality to communion but not to agency (with moral exemplars being an exception to that rule; Frimer & Oakes, 2013;Frimer, Walker, Dunlop, Lee, & Riches, 2011;Frimer, Walker, Riches, Lee, & Dunlop, 2012). Hence, expressiveness processes may leave little room for social motives processes.…”

Exploring the Motives of Citizen Reporting Engagement: Self-Concern and Other-Orientation

“…In organizational research, it is often assumed that people with highly pronounced concern both for themselves and for others generate the most persistent contributions to others (Frimer et al 2012;Grant 2014;Bolino and Grant 2016). Grant (2014) suggests that organizational performance benefits most from people with a high emphasis on both types of motivation at the same time.…”