Beyond Harm and Fairness: A Study of Deviance and Morality

ABSTRACT

Using data from 1,429 students, we test whether a moral foundations approach focusing on both individual- and group-oriented measures of morality improves our ability to predict deviant behavior over and above the effects of individual-oriented measures alone. Results show that the emphasis individuals place on group-oriented moral concerns is inversely associated with a range of deviant behaviors. Moreover, these associations are stronger and more pervasive than the emphasis placed on individual-level moral concerns. Additionally, we find that a recently developed “moral identity” measure does not add to the prediction of deviant behavior over and above group-oriented measures.

Notes

1 These five moral foundations are consistent with, but expand on, several existing taxonomies of moral concern, including Fiske’s (1992) four models of social relationships; Shweder et al.’s (1997) three ethics of autonomy, community, and divinity; and Hogan, Johnson, and Emler’s (1978) theory of moral development.

2 This difference was observed in abstract assessments of the moral relevance of foundation-related concerns such as violence and loyalty, moral judgments of statements and scenarios, reactions to trade-offs involving violations of sacredness, and the use of foundation-related terms in the moral texts of religious sermons (Graham et al. 2009).

3 This solution accounted for 53% of cumulative variance (with factor 1 accounting for 37% and factor 2 accounting for 16%). The rotated (varimax) solution indicated that the Ingroup/Loyalty, Authority/Respect, and Purity/Sanctity measures loaded on factor 1 (with coefficients of .626, .854, .613, respectively) and that the Harm/Care and Fairness/Reciprocity measures loaded on factor 2 (with coefficients of .815 and .618, respectively).

4 Not only are the care and justice identity dimensions highly correlated, according to Stets and Carter (2012:129), “[f]rom an identity perspective, a care identity and a justice identity are very close in semantic space, such that measuring one identity would capture important meanings in the other.”

5 Parallel analyses were conducted for ever engaging in each of the deviant acts and for engaging in these acts during the past month. The effects for the moral foundation measures were strikingly consistent with those reported above (for the past year) in terms of the size, direction, and significance of the coefficients. With respect to the control variables, only Black showed a change in the direction of its coefficient, and only in the model for ever having stolen from a person or store: while the coefficient was negative and non-significant in the past year model (shown above) it was positive and significant (odds ratio = 1.56, p < .05) in the ever model. All other control variable coefficients in both the past month and ever models were in the same direction as those reported above for the past year, although the p-values varied somewhat across models. Results for the past month and ever models are available from the authors on request.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Eric Silver

ERIC SILVER is Professor of Sociology and Criminology and Associate Dean for Research and Graduate Studies in the College of the Liberal Arts at Penn State University. Dr. Silver’s research focuses on deviance and social control. His publications appear in Criminology, Social Problems, American Journal of Public Health, Social Science and Medicine, and Deviant Behavior, among other outlets.

Leslie Abell

LESLIE ABELL is a Lecturer in the Sociology Program at California State University, Channel Islands. Her research focuses on deviance, gender, and desistance.