Moral expansiveness: Examining variability in the extension of the moral world.

Abstract

The nature of our moral judgments-and the extent to which we treat others with care-depend in part on the distinctions we make between entities deemed worthy or unworthy of moral consideration-our moral boundaries. Philosophers, historians, and social scientists have noted that people's moral boundaries have expanded over the last few centuries, but the notion of moral expansiveness has received limited empirical attention in psychology. This research explores variations in the size of individuals' moral boundaries using the psychological construct of moral expansiveness and introduces the Moral Expansiveness Scale (MES), designed to capture this variation. Across 6 studies, we established the reliability, convergent validity, and predictive validity of the MES. Moral expansiveness was related (but not reducible) to existing moral constructs (moral foundations, moral identity, "moral" universalism values), predictors of moral standing (moral patiency and warmth), and other constructs associated with concern for others (empathy, identification with humanity, connectedness to nature, and social responsibility). Importantly, the MES uniquely predicted willingness to engage in prosocial intentions and behaviors at personal cost independently of these established constructs. Specifically, the MES uniquely predicted willingness to prioritize humanitarian and environmental concerns over personal and national self-interest, willingness to sacrifice one's life to save others (ranging from human out-groups to animals and plants), and volunteering behavior. Results demonstrate that moral expansiveness is a distinct and important factor in understanding moral judgments and their consequences. (PsycINFO Database Record

Disgust sensitivity is primarily associated with purity-based moral judgments

“…Importantly, correlations between the MFV and MFQ are indeed small to medium, which is not surprising since studies show that people express different degrees of moral concern depending on situation specific characteristics (e.g., Crimston, Bain, Hornsey, & Bastian, 2016;Cushman, Young, & Hauser, 2006). We believe that the most crucial contribution of our research, though, concerns disgust sensitivity's relative relation to each of the moral domains.…”

The what, how, and why of moralization: A review of current definitions, methods, and evidence in moralization research

“…An emerging perspective in the study of moralization has been to investigate differences in the level of moral concern for entities (Crimston, Bain, Hornsey, & Bastian, ; Crimston, Hornsey, Bain, & Bastian, ). This conceptualization of moralization is defined by a focus on whether an entire category of groups (e.g., criminals, out‐groups, and family members) or entities (e.g., redwood trees, dolphins, and rivers) are perceived as generally deserving of moral concern (Crimston et al, ) or can be considered moral patients/victims (Schein & Gray, , ). The advantage of this approach is that it can potentially simultaneously predict the attachment of, or increase in, moral significance of a number of attitudes or actions (for example items, see Figure ).…”

“…Attitudes item is taken from Skitka, L. J., Bauman, and Sargis, E. G. (2005). Entities item is taken from Crimston et al ()…”

What Motivates Green Living? A Qualitative Investigation of Sustainable Life Choices

“…This is an important indicator that sustainable living is a question of morality, as morals and values constitute one of the most important cultural legacies and parents are its primary bearers (Sterelny 2010). Making sustainability a question of morality is important if living unsustainably is to be perceived as wrong (Crimston et al 2016). Moral actions also have the power to elicit motivational feelings such as pride, admiration, and shame (Bissing-Olson et al 2016).…”