Mindfulness and Cognitive Depletion Shape the Relationship between Moral Conviction and Intolerance of Dissimilar Others

Abstract

When people vest a position with moral conviction, that is, a sense tha t the position is grounded in fundamental right or wrong, good or bad, they tend to be particularly intolerant of those who disagree. Psychological states that mitigate or augment the effect of moral conviction on tolerance are lesser known. The present research investigated the immediate consequences of mindfulness and mindlessness (cognitive depletion) on the relationship between moral conviction and preferred social distance. Consistent with hypotheses, moral conviction did not predict preferred social distance in a mindfulness condition (mindfulness meditation), predicted greater preferred social distance in a mindlessness condition (cognitive depletion), and predicted marginally greater preferred social distance in a control condition (no manipulation). Findings suggest that adopting a mindful orientation toward people with different moral views may foster acceptance, while adopting a mindless orientation may foster greater intolerance.

Deliberative thinking increases tolerance of minority group practices: Testing a dual-process model of tolerance.

“…Experimentally, encouraging people to trust their intuitions reduces reflective moral responding (see Evans & Stanovich, 2013; Trémolière et al, 2017) and can promote greater intolerance (Baumgartner & Morgan, 2019). Apart from motivated reasoning, deliberative thinking as a “sober second thought” might make people reconsider their intuitive negative reaction toward practices they perceive as objectionable and wrong (e.g., Peffley et al, 2001).…”

“…Apart from motivated reasoning, deliberative thinking as a “sober second thought” might make people reconsider their intuitive negative reaction toward practices they perceive as objectionable and wrong (e.g., Peffley et al, 2001). Research finds that individuals can change their minds about a moral question when they are asked to reflect on it (Paxton et al, 2012), that deliberative thinking can lead to less emotion-based moral judgments (Pennycook et al, 2015), that adopting a mindful orientation can lead to higher acceptance (Baumgartner & Morgan, 2019), and that considered thoughtful and relevant arguments lead to increased acceptance (Petersen et al, 2010; Sniderman et al, 1989). Therefore, it has been argued theoretically that tolerance is more likely when people engage in deliberative thinking in which they consider reasons for condoning what they disagree with, disapprove of, or object to (Verkuyten et al, 2021).…”

“…However, compared to laboratory experiments, survey experiments with national sample are recognized as a powerful mean for combining the internal validity of an experimental design with the possibility to draw generalizable conclusions about social attitudes and beliefs (Schlueter & Schmidt, 2010;Sniderman, 2018). Furthermore, small effects can be of theoretical and practical importance (Götz et al, 2021) and similar low effect sizes have been found in experimental research on dual process models of moral judgment (Capraro et al, 2019) and intolerance (Baumgartner & Morgan, 2019). The fact that our manipulation showed the expected effect suggests that even simple online instructions can influence the degree to which individuals tolerate minority group practices.…”