A time for moral actions: Moral identity, morality-as-cooperation and moral circles predict support of collective action to fight the COVID-19 pandemic in an international sample

IF 4 2区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL Group Processes & Intergroup Relations Pub Date : 2023-06-10 DOI:10.1177/13684302231153800
Paulo S Boggio, J. Nezlek, M. Alfano, Flávio Azevedo, V. Capraro, A. Cichocka, P. Pärnamets, Gabriel Gaudencio Rego, Waldir M. Sampaio, Hallgeir Sjåstad, J. V. Van Bavel
{"title":"A time for moral actions: Moral identity, morality-as-cooperation and moral circles predict support of collective action to fight the COVID-19 pandemic in an international sample","authors":"Paulo S Boggio, J. Nezlek, M. Alfano, Flávio Azevedo, V. Capraro, A. Cichocka, P. Pärnamets, Gabriel Gaudencio Rego, Waldir M. Sampaio, Hallgeir Sjåstad, J. V. Van Bavel","doi":"10.1177/13684302231153800","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Understanding what factors are linked to public health behavior in a global pandemic is critical to mobilizing an effective public health response. Although public policy and health messages are often framed through the lens of individual benefit, many of the behavioral strategies needed to combat a pandemic require individual sacrifices to benefit the collective welfare. Therefore, we examined the relationship between individuals’ morality and their support for public health measures. In a large-scale study with samples from 68 countries worldwide (Study 1; N = 46,576), we found robust evidence that moral identity, morality-as-cooperation, and moral circles are each positively related to people’s willingness to engage in public health behaviors and policy support. Together, these moral dispositions accounted for 9.8%, 10.2%, and 6.2% of support for limiting contact, improving hygiene, and supporting policy change, respectively. These morality variables (Study 2) and Schwartz’s values dimensions (Study 3) were also associated with behavioral responses across 42 countries in the form of reduced physical mobility during the pandemic. These results suggest that morality may help mobilize citizens to support public health policy.","PeriodicalId":48099,"journal":{"name":"Group Processes & Intergroup Relations","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Group Processes & Intergroup Relations","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/13684302231153800","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Understanding what factors are linked to public health behavior in a global pandemic is critical to mobilizing an effective public health response. Although public policy and health messages are often framed through the lens of individual benefit, many of the behavioral strategies needed to combat a pandemic require individual sacrifices to benefit the collective welfare. Therefore, we examined the relationship between individuals’ morality and their support for public health measures. In a large-scale study with samples from 68 countries worldwide (Study 1; N = 46,576), we found robust evidence that moral identity, morality-as-cooperation, and moral circles are each positively related to people’s willingness to engage in public health behaviors and policy support. Together, these moral dispositions accounted for 9.8%, 10.2%, and 6.2% of support for limiting contact, improving hygiene, and supporting policy change, respectively. These morality variables (Study 2) and Schwartz’s values dimensions (Study 3) were also associated with behavioral responses across 42 countries in the form of reduced physical mobility during the pandemic. These results suggest that morality may help mobilize citizens to support public health policy.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
道德行动的时代:在一个国际样本中,道德认同、道德即合作和道德界预测了对集体行动的支持,以抗击COVID-19大流行
了解全球大流行中哪些因素与公共卫生行为有关,对于动员有效的公共卫生应对措施至关重要。尽管公共政策和健康信息通常是从个人利益的角度出发的,但抗击疫情所需的许多行为策略都需要个人做出牺牲,以造福集体福利。因此,我们研究了个人道德与他们对公共卫生措施的支持之间的关系。在一项针对全球68个国家样本的大规模研究中(研究1;N=46576),我们发现强有力的证据表明,道德认同、合作道德和道德圈都与人们参与公共卫生行为和政策支持的意愿呈正相关。这些道德倾向加在一起,分别占对限制接触、改善卫生和支持政策变化的支持的9.8%、10.2%和6.2%。这些道德变量(研究2)和Schwartz的价值观维度(研究3)也与42个国家的行为反应有关,这些行为反应表现为疫情期间身体活动减少。这些结果表明,道德可能有助于动员公民支持公共卫生政策。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
8.50
自引率
4.50%
发文量
76
期刊介绍: Group Processes & Intergroup Relations is a scientific social psychology journal dedicated to research on social psychological processes within and between groups. It provides a forum for and is aimed at researchers and students in social psychology and related disciples (e.g., organizational and management sciences, political science, sociology, language and communication, cross cultural psychology, international relations) that have a scientific interest in the social psychology of human groups. The journal has an extensive editorial team that includes many if not most of the leading scholars in social psychology of group processes and intergroup relations from around the world.
期刊最新文献
Judgments toward displays of national (dis)loyalty in members of nations other than one’s own: Universalistic and parochial perspectives Two Paths to Violence: Individual versus Group Emotions during Conflict Escalation in the Occupied Palestinian Territories “Ins and outs”: Ethnic identity, the need to belong, and responses to inclusion and exclusion in inclusive common ingroups Divergent views of party positions: How ideology and own issue position shape party perception through convergence and divergence processes Corrigendum to “Tackling loneliness together: A three-tier social identity framework for social prescribing”
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1