• Introduction to Moral Conviction:
  • Moral conviction is defined as attitudes held with strong moral conviction, referred to as moral mandates. These are predicted to have distinct interpersonal consequences compared to strong but nonmoral attitudes.
  • The study explores how moral conviction affects preferences for social and physical distance from attitudinally dissimilar others, and its impact on group interaction and decision-making in attitudinally homogeneous versus heterogeneous groups.
  • Results supported the moral mandate hypothesis, showing that stronger moral conviction leads to greater preferred social and physical distance from attitudinally dissimilar others, intolerance of attitudinally dissimilar others, lower levels of goodwill and cooperativeness in attitudinally heterogeneous groups, and a greater inability to generate procedural solutions to resolve disagreements.
• Attitude Strength:
  • The concept of attitude strength encompasses durability over time, resistance to change, impact on information processing and judgment, and likelihood of guiding behavior. Features of attitude strength include extremity, importance, certainty, centrality, and accessibility.
  • The article proposes that attitudes rooted in moral conviction are fundamentally different from equally strong but nonmoral attitudes. This distinction is based on the unique interpersonal consequences of moral conviction.
• Moral Conviction:
  • Moral conviction refers to a strong and absolute belief that something is right or wrong, moral or immoral. These convictions are experienced as unique, special, and in a class of their own, distinguished by universalism, perceived as factual beliefs, compelling motives, and justification for action, and often accompanied by strong emotions.
• Studies Overview:
  • Four studies were conducted to examine whether strength of moral conviction predicts unique variance beyond other indices of attitude strength on interpersonal measures.
  • The studies explored the effects of moral conviction on preferred social distance, intolerance of attitudinally dissimilar others in both intimate and distant relationships, and group dynamics in attitudinally homogeneous versus heterogeneous groups.
• Theoretical Rationale:
  • The article reviews current attitude strength theory and research, the rationale for attitudes rooted in moral conviction being different from their nonmoral counterparts, and the potential interpersonal consequences of attitude dissimilarity.
  • It discusses the idea that moral convictions are different from other kinds of attitudes or have stronger associations with behavior than nonmoral attitudes.
• Evidence from Literature:
  • Various studies and examples are cited to support the hypothesis that attitudes based on moral convictions may have higher action potentials than attitudes reflecting nonmoral tastes, preferences, or social conventions.
  • Moral Conviction Across Different Attitude Domains: The study found correlations between moral conviction and social distance preferences across various attitude domains, including abortion, capital punishment, legalization of marijuana, and nuclear power. Adding moral conviction to regression equations led to significant R2 changes in predicting social distance across all four issue domains, underscoring the unique contribution of moral conviction beyond traditional markers of attitude strength.
  • Physical Distance and Moral Conviction (Study 3): This part of the study investigated how moral conviction influences physical distance in an interaction scenario. Results showed that the physical distance participants chose to maintain from a pro-choice target varied significantly as a function of their moral conviction and attitude similarity/dissimilarity, even after controlling for attitude dissimilarity and other dimensions of attitude strength.
  • Group Dynamics and Moral Conviction (Study 4): Study 4 focused on group dynamics, examining how discussing morally mandated issues versus nonmoral issues affects group interaction. Findings revealed that groups discussing morally mandated issues experienced more strain, less goodwill, and cooperativeness, and were more likely to exhibit tension and defensiveness, especially in attitudinally heterogeneous groups. Additionally, these groups had more difficulty reaching consensus on a procedure to resolve the issue, highlighting the distinct impact of moral conviction on group decision-making processes.
  • Goodwill, Cooperativeness, Tension, and Defensiveness: Measures of goodwill and cooperativeness decreased, while tension and defensiveness increased in groups discussing morally mandated issues in heterogenous settings. These effects underscore the challenges of resolving conflicts surrounding moral mandates.
  • Implications for Understanding Moral Conviction: The results from these studies suggest that moral conviction contributes uniquely to interpersonal and group dynamics, beyond what is explained by attitude strength alone. Moral conviction affects preferences for social and physical distance, influences group climate, and complicates the process of reaching procedural consensus on morally charged issues.
• Interpersonal and Group Dynamics: Morally mandated issues, compared to strong but nonmoral attitudes, evoke stronger negative reactions when there's attitude dissimilarity among individuals. This effect is evident in various contexts, including preferred social and physical distance and the overall climate within groups discussing controversial issues. Groups discussing morally mandated topics in heterogeneous settings reported lower levels of goodwill and cooperativeness and higher levels of tension and defensiveness.
• Consensus on Morally Mandated Issues: The ability of groups to reach consensus on procedures to resolve issues is significantly hampered when the issues are morally mandated, regardless of group composition. This suggests a unique challenge posed by moral mandates, highlighting the difficulty of reconciling divergent moral viewpoints.
• Cognitive and Emotional Influences: The study explores potential cognitive and emotional factors contributing to the observed effects of moral conviction, including cognitive rigidity, intolerance of ambiguity, and the elicitation of specific moral emotions. These factors may underpin the strong responses to morally mandated issues and the difficulty in reaching consensus on such matters.
• Implications for Social Conflict and Morality in Social Psychology: The findings underscore the complex role of moral conviction in social conflict and interactions. While moral conviction can drive prosocial behaviors and activism, it also has a darker side, potentially contributing to intolerance and extreme actions. The article calls for further exploration of the factors leading to moral mandates and the broader consequences of morally mandated attitudes, including resistance to persuasion and the impact on prosocial versus antisocial behaviors.
• Future Directions and Theoretical Implications: The research opens new avenues for understanding the formation and impact of moral convictions on social behavior. Future studies could explore the resistance of moral mandates to persuasive appeals and the effect of moral emotions on moral judgment and behavior. Understanding what leads individuals to develop moral convictions about some issues and not others could provide valuable insights into addressing social conflicts rooted in moral differences.