Abstract
Abstract. In moral foundations research, two single-item measures of political orientation – with anchors labeled “liberal-conservative” or “left-right” – have been alternatively used. Using a Finnish representative sample, we employed both measures. High conservatism was associated with binding foundations (loyalty, authority, and sanctity), while the associations with the individualizing foundations (harm and fairness) were practically zero. By contrast, the left-right dimension was not associated with the sanctity foundation, but was associated with all other foundations. The measures of political orientation were interchangeable only for fairness; harm was more strongly associated with the left-right dimension, and all binding foundations were more strongly associated with the liberal-conservative dimension. This suggests that at least in some countries, the liberal-conservative and left-right measures are not interchangeable.
References
2013). Political conservatism and left-right orientation in 28 eastern and western European Countries. Political Psychology, 34, 409–417. doi: 10.1111/pops.12000
(2009). National surveys via RDD telephone interviewing versus the internet comparing sample representativeness and response quality. Public Opinion Quarterly, 73, 641–678. doi: 10.1093/poq/nfp075
(2014). The new statistics: Why and how. Psychological Science, 25, 7–29. doi: 10.1177/0956797613504966
(2014). Confirmatory factor analysis of the moral foundations questionnaire: Independent scale validation in a New Zealand sample. Social Psychology, 45, 431–436. doi: 10.1027/1864-9335/a000201
(2012). Will morality or political ideology determine attitudes to climate change? Australian Community Psychologist, 24, 8–25.
(2009). A dual-process motivational model of ideology, politics, and prejudice. Psychological Inquiry, 20, 98–109. doi: 10.1080/10478400903028540
(2013). Mapping the connections between politics and morality: The multiple sociopolitical orientations involved in moral intuition. Political Psychology, 34, 589–610. doi: 10.1111/pops.12006
(2013).
(Political ideology . In L. HuddyD. O. SearsJ. S. LevyEds., Oxford handbook of political psychology (pp. 591–626). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.2014). Understanding the determinants of political ideology: Implications of structural complexity. Political Psychology, 35, 337–358. doi: 10.1111/pops.12055
(1996). Ideologies and political theory: A conceptual approach. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
(2013). Moral foundations theory: The pragmatic validity of moral pluralism. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 47, 55–130. doi: 10.1016/B978-0-12-407236-7.00002-4
(2009). Liberals and conservatives rely on different sets of moral foundations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96, 1029–1046. doi: 10.1037/a0015141
(2011). Mapping the moral domain. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 101, 366–385. doi: 10.1037/a0021847
(2012). The righteous mind. Why good people are divided by politics and religion. New York, NY: Vintage Books/Random House.
(2010). Compassionate liberals and polite conservatives: Associations of agreeableness with political ideology and moral values. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 36, 655–664. doi: 10.1177/0146167210366854
(2009). “Elective affinities”: On the psychological bases of left-right differences. Psychological Inquiry, 20, 129–141. doi: 10.1080/10478400903028599
(2003). Political conservatism as motivated social cognition. Psychological Bulletin, 129, 339–375. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.129.3.339
(2015, November 24). Measuring model fit [Online resource]. Retrieved from http://davidakenny.net/cm/fit.htm
(2006). Transformations of the concept of ideology in the twentieth century. American Political Science Review, 100, 619–626.
(2012). Tracing the threads: How five moral concerns (especially Purity) help explain culture war attitudes. Journal of Research in Personality, 46, 184–194. doi: 10.1016/j.jrp.2012.01.006
(2011). From left to right: How the personality system allows basic traits to influence politics via characteristic moral adaptations. British Journal of Psychology, 102, 546–558. doi: 10.1111/j.2044-8295.2011.02016.x
(2014). Do needs for security and certainty predict cultural and economic conservatism? A cross-national analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 106, 1031. doi: 10.1037/a0036170
(2015). The Moral Foundations taxonomy: Structural validity and relation to political ideology in Sweden. Personality and Individual Differences, 76, 28–32. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2014.11.049
(2011). Basic personal values and the meaning of left-right political orientations in 20 countries. Political Psychology, 32, 537–561. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9221.2011.00828.x
(2010). Basic personal values, core political values, and voting: A longitudinal analysis. Political Psychology, 31, 421–452. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9221.2010.00764.x
(2014). Basic personal values underlie and give coherence to political values: A cross national study in 15 countries. Political Behavior, 36, 899–930. doi: 10.1007/s11109-013-9255-z
(1991). Semantic and pragmatic aspects of context effects in social and psychological research. Social Cognition, 9, 111–125. doi: 10.1521/soco.1991.9.1.111
(2009). Perceptions of social dangers, moral foundations, and political orientation. Personality and Individual Differences, 47, 169–173. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2009.02.017
(