Synonyms
Definition
Moral foundations theory is a descriptive theory about the diverse contents of moral psychology, particularly moral judgment. It contends that human moral judgment (a) is primarily an intuitive, non-rational process, and (b) can be broken down into discrete categories of moral intuition that each process different types of moral stimuli and that function to sustain features of human sociality. Extant theory posits five core domains of moral intuition, geared toward the processing of information pertaining to: (i) harm versus care; (ii) fairness versus cheating; (iii) loyalty versus betrayal; (iv) authority/respect versus subversion; and (v) purity/sanctity versus degradation.
Introduction
Moral foundations theory (MFT) was developed by social psychologist Jonathan Haidt and his colleagues to describe the wide array of human moral judgments, values, and behaviors in terms of underlying moral intuition and emotion. It...
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Baumard, N., André, J. B., & Sperber, D. (2013). A mutualistic approach to morality: The evolution of fairness by partner choice. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 36(01), 59–78.
Bulbulia, J., Osborne, D., & Sibley, C. G. (2013). Moral foundations predict religious orientations in New Zealand. PloS One, 8(12), e80224.
Crone, D. L., & Laham, S. M. (2015). Multiple moral foundations predict responses to sacrificial dilemmas. Personality and Individual Differences, 85, 60–65.
Feinberg, M., & Willer, R. (2013). The moral roots of environmental attitudes. Psychological Science, 24(1), 56–62.
Fiske, A. P. (2000). Complementarity theory: Why human social capacities evolved to require cultural complements. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 4(1), 76–94.
Frimer, J. A., Biesanz, J. C., Walker, L. J., & MacKinlay, C. W. (2013). Liberals and conservatives rely on common moral foundations when making moral judgments about influential people. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 104(6), 1040–1059. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0032277.
Frimer, J. A., Tell, C. E., & Haidt, J. (2015). Liberals condemn sacrilege too: The harmless desecration of Cerro Torre. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 6(8), 878–886.
Glenn, A. L., Iyer, R., Graham, J., Koleva, S., & Haidt, J. (2009). Are all types of morality compromised in psychopathy? Journal of Personality Disorders, 23(4), 384–398.
Graham, J., & Haidt, J. (2010). Beyond beliefs: Religions bind individuals into moral communities. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 14(1), 140–150.
Graham, J., Haidt, J., & Nosek, B. A. (2009). Liberals and conservatives rely on different sets of moral foundations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96(5), 1029.
Graham, J., Nosek, B. A., Haidt, J., Iyer, R., Koleva, S., & Ditto, P. H. (2011). Mapping the moral domain. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 101(2), 366.
Graham, J., Haidt, J., Koleva, S., Motyl, M., Iyer, R., Wojcik, S., & Ditto, P. H. (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.
Gray, K., Young, L., & Waytz, A. (2012). Mind perception is the essence of morality. Psychological Inquiry, 23, 101–124.
Haidt, J. (2001). The emotional dog and its rationalist tail: A social intuitionist approach to moral judgment. Psychological Review, 108, 814–834.
Haidt, J. (2008). Morality. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 3(1), 65–72.
Haidt, J., & Graham, J. (2007). When morality opposes justice: Conservatives have moral intuitions that liberals may not recognize. Social Justice Research, 20(1), 98–116.
Haidt, J., Koller, S. H., & Dias, M. G. (1993). Affect, culture, and morality, or is it wrong to eat your dog? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65(4), 613–628.
Haidt, J., Graham, J., & Joseph, C. (2009). Above and below left–right: Ideological narratives and moral foundations. Psychological Inquiry, 20(2–3), 110–119.
Iyer, R., Koleva, S., Graham, J., Ditto, P., & Haidt, J. (2012). Understanding libertarian morality: The psychological dispositions of self-identified libertarians. PLoS ONE, 7(8), e42366. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0042366.
Kim, K. R., Kang, J., & Yun, S. (2012). Moral intuitions and political orientation: Similarities and differences between South Korea and the United States. Psychological Reports, 111(1), 173–185. https://doi.org/10.2466/ 17.09.21.PR0.111.4.173-185.
Koleva, S. P., Graham, J., Iyer, R., Ditto, P. H., & Haidt, J. (2012). Tracing the threads: How five moral concerns (especially purity) help explain culture war attitudes. Journal of Research in Personality, 46(2), 184–194. https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.jrp.2012.01.0063514.60.5.656.
Koleva, S., Selterman, D., Iyer, R., Ditto, P., & Graham, J. (2014). The moral compass of insecurity: Anxious and avoidant attachment predict moral judgment. Social Psychological and Personality Science. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550613490965.
Lewis, G. J., & Bates, T. C. (2011). From left to right: How the personality system allows basic traits to influence politics via characteristic moral adaptations. British Journal of Psychology, 102(3), 546–558.
Piazza, J., & Landy, J. (2013). “Lean not on your own understanding”: Belief that morality is founded on divine authority and non-utilitarian moral thinking. Judgment and Decision making, 8(6), 639–661.
Rai, T. S., & Fiske, A. P. (2011). Moral psychology is relationship regulation: Moral motives for unity, hierarchy, equality, and proportionality. Psychological Review, 118(1), 57–75. https://doi.org/10.1037/A0021867.
Shariff, A. F., Piazza, J., & Kramer, S. R. (2014). Morality and the religious mind: Why theists and nontheists differ. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 18(9), 439–441.
Shweder, R. A., Much, N. C., Mahapatra, M., & Park, L. (1997). The “big three” of morality (autonomy, community, divinity) and the “big three” explanations of suffering (pp. 119–169). Florence: Taylor & Frances/Routledge.
Simpson, A., & Laham, S. M. (2015a). Different relational models underlie prototypical left and right positions on social issues. European Journal of Social Psychology, 45(2), 204–217.
Simpson, A., & Laham, S. M. (2015b). Individual differences in relational construal are associated with variability in moral judgment. Personality and Individual Differences, 74, 49–54.
Simpson, A., & Rios, K. (2016). How do US Christians and atheists stereotype one another’s moral values?. The International Journal for the Psychology of Religion, 26(4), 320–336.
Simpson, A., Laham, S. M., & Fiske, A. P. (2016). Wrongness in different relationships: Relational context effects on moral judgment. The Journal of Social Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224545.2016.1140118.
Simpson, A., Crone, D. L., & Laham, S. M. (2017). Perceived relevance of moral foundations in moral judgment: Evidence for moral pluralism (not monism). Manuscript in preparation.
Turiel, E. (1983). The development of social knowledge: Morality and convention. Cambridge: University Press.
van Leeuwen, F., Park, J. H., Koenig, B. L., & Graham, J. (2012). Regional variation in pathogen prevalence predicts endorsement of group-focused moral concerns. Evolution and Human Behavior, 33(5), 429–437.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Section Editor information
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this entry
Cite this entry
Simpson, A. (2020). Moral Foundations Theory. In: Zeigler-Hill, V., Shackelford, T.K. (eds) Encyclopedia of Personality and Individual Differences. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-24612-3_1253
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-24612-3_1253
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-24610-9
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-24612-3
eBook Packages: Behavioral Science and PsychologyReference Module Humanities and Social SciencesReference Module Business, Economics and Social Sciences