Need for Closure, Torture, and Punishment Motivations
The Mediating Role of Moral Foundations
Abstract
Abstract. When considering how criminals should be punished, most individuals prefer retributive (i.e., punishment compensating for the harm caused by the perpetrator) over utilitarian justice (i.e., punishment with the intent to deter future crime). However, past research has found that individuals with a high (vs. low) need for cognitive closure (NCC) are more likely to endorse utilitarian punishment. In three studies, we replicated past research on the association between need for closure and utilitarian justice (Study 1), and found that this relationship is mediated by moral concerns pertaining to group unity and cohesion (Study 2). In Study 3 we examine another instance of utilitarian policy: torture. Our data provide evidence that preference for utilitarian punishment is rooted in basic moral concerns.
References
2011). Il moral foundations questionnaire: Analisi della struttura fattoriale della versione italiana
([The moral foundations questionnaire: Structural factor analyses of the Italian version] . Giornale di Psicologia, 5, 7–18.2013). Worldview implications of believing in free will and/or determinism: Politics, morality, and punitiveness. Journal of Personality, 81, 130–141. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.2012.00799.x
(2006). The roles of retribution and utility in determining punishment. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 42, 437–451. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2005.06.007
(2008). On justifying punishment: The discrepancy between words and actions. Social Justice Research, 21, 119–137. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11211-008-0068-x
(2008). Psychological aspects of retributive justice. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 40, 193–236. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601(07)00004-4
(2002). Why do we punish? Deterrence and just deserts as motives for punishment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83, 284–299. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.83.2.284
(2009). The fine line between interrogation and retribution. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 45, 191–196. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2008.08.025
(1987). Sentencing goals, causal attributions, ideology and personality. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 107–118. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.52.1.107
(1998). The sentencing goals inventory: Development and validation, Poster session presented at the biennial meeting of the American Psychology-Law Society, Redondo Beach, CA
(2000). Incapacitation and just deserts as motives for punishment. Law and Human Behavior, 24, 659–683. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1005552203727
(1983). Public opinion and capital punishment: A close examination of the views of abolitionists and retentionists. Crime & Delinquency, 29, 116–169. https://doi.org/10.1177/001112878302900105
(2002). Reactions to mandatory sentences in relation to the ethnic identity and criminal history of the offender. Law and Human Behavior, 26, 417–438. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1016331221797
(2016). Epistemic motivation and the structure of moral intuition: Dispositional need for closure as a predictor of individualizing and binding morality. European Journal of Personality, 30, 227–239. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.2055
(2013). Mapping the connections between politics and morality: The multiple sociopolitical orientations involved in moral intuition. Political Psychology, 34, 589–610. https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.12006
(2014). Individual differences underlying punishment motivation the role of need for cognitive closure. Social Psychology, 45, 449–457. https://doi.org/10.1027/1864-9335/a000211
(2013). Moral foundations theory: The pragmatic validity of moral pluralism. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 47, 55–130. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-407236-7.00002-4
(2008). The Moral Foundations Questionnaire, Retrieved from http://MoralFoundations.org
(2009). Liberals and conservatives rely on different sets of moral foundations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96, 1029–1046. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0015141
(2011). Mapping the moral domain. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 101, 366–385. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0021847
(2008).
(The moral mind: How five sets of innate intuitions guide the development of many culture-specific virtues, and perhaps even modules . In P. CarruthersS. LaurenceS. StichEds., The Innate mind (Vol. 3, pp. 367–391). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
(2010). A closer look at an eye for an eye: Laypersons’ punishment decisions are primarily driven by retributive motives. Social Justice Research, 23, 99–116. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11211-010-0113-4
(2014). The moral compass of insecurity: Anxious, and avoidant attachment predict moral judgment. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 5, 185–194. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550613490965
(2012). Tracing the threads: How five moral concerns (especially purity) help explain culture war attitudes. Journal of Research in Personality, 46, 184–194. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2012.01.006
(2006). Groups as epistemic providers: Need for closure and the unfolding of group-centrism. Psychological Review, 113, 84–100. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.113.1.84
(2014). Another look at moral foundations theory: Do authoritarianism and social dominance orientation explain liberal-conservative differences in “moral” intuitions? Social Justice Research, 27, 413–431. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11211-014-0223-5
(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. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8295.2011.02016.x
(1978). Sentencing strategies and justice: Effects of punishment philosophy on sentencing decisions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 36, 1490–1500. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.36.12.1490
(2008). Revenge, retribution, and values: Social attitudes and punitive sentencing. Social Justice Research, 21, 138–163. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11211-008-0066-z
(2014). Moral intuitions or political rhetoric? A reexamination of ideological differences across the Moral Foundations Scale, Unpublished manuscript. University of Chicago
(2005). Revised need for cognitive closure scale, Unpublished manuscript. Università di Roma, “La Sapienza”
(2015). The motivated gatekeeper of our minds: New directions in need for closure theory and research. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 52, 221–283. https://doi.org/10.1016/bs.aesp.2015.01.001
(2014). Free will and punishment: A mechanistic view of human nature reduces retribution. Psychological Science, 25, 1563–1570. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797614534693
(1980). Tests for comparing elements of a correlation matrix. Psychological Bulletin, 87, 245–251. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.87.2.245
(2015). Hierarchy, dominance, and deliberation: Egalitarian values require mental effort. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 41, 1207–1222. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167215591961
(2016).
(Retributive justice . In C. SabbaghM. SchmittEds., Handbook of social justice theory and research (pp. 237–256). New York, NY: Springer.2008). Retributive and restorative justice. Law and Human Behavior, 32, 375–389. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10979-007-9116-6
(