In the APSA Public Scholarship Program, graduate students in political science produce summaries of new research in the American Political Science Review. This piece, written by Dirck de Kleer, covers the new article by Jae-Hee Jung and Scott Clifford, “Varieties of Values: Moral Values Are Uniquely Divisive.”
Values matter in politics. They help explain opinions on topics ranging from homelessness to foreign policy and our political orientations. Moral values in particular can help explain why liberals and conservatives dislike each other. But how are moral values different from other values? In a new APSR article, Jae-Hee Jung and Scott Clifford show that we don’t see all values as a matter of right and wrong. But for those that we do see as such, disagreement over value positions increases social polarization.
Values can be seen as goals, some more important, some less so, that apply to different situations and give us some guiding principles. Scholars have organized values in different value systems. Social psychologist Shalom Schwartz, for example, posits ten basic human values. Other psychologists have posited five moral foundations under the banner of “Moral Foundations Theory.” Then we can think of different political values (e.g., “less or more equality?” or “less or more government?”) that overlap with other sets of values.
But not all values are alike. Between and within these value systems, some values are more focused on the self, think of personal achievement or power, while others are more about how we cooperate with others, such as fairness or loyalty. People tend to connect these cooperative values more to fundamental ideas about right and wrong. In other words, these values are more frequently moralized.
Disagreement over these moralized values increases polarization. The authors argue that we perceive moral values to be objectively and universally true. There is right and wrong. If somebody disagrees, this can be perceived as a threat. This elicits a strong reaction because we want to correct the views of those who disagree with us (or exclude them from our lives altogether).
“These fictional persons, with varying ages, party affiliations, and hobbies, agreed or disagreed with one of the values that respondents had rated earlier in the survey.” The authors conducted an online survey among 863 Americans to investigate which values are moralized and how disagreement over these values increases polarization. Respondents were asked about their opinions on 21 values; some more self-oriented values, some more cooperative. The survey showed two things. First, some values are indeed more moral than others. There is a huge variety. For all 21 values, respondents rated to what extent the value was connected to their “fundamental beliefs about right and wrong.” More cooperative values such as care, fairness, or benevolence scored much higher on moralization than more self-oriented values such as stimulation, hedonism, or power.
Second, the authors embedded an experiment in the survey that shows that disagreement over these and other moral values leads to more polarization. In the experiment, the authors showed hypothetical persons to respondents. These fictional persons, with varying ages, party affiliations, and hobbies, agreed or disagreed with one of the values that respondents had rated earlier in the survey.
Respondents were then asked some questions that measure social polarization. They were asked how “positive or negative” they felt toward the person, how “happy or unhappy” they would be to have the person as a neighbor, and how comfortable they would feel having this person look after their house while they were out of town. The effect of disagreement over a value position was much stronger for moralized values.
This study shows how different values have different consequences. This helps us better understand when and why value differences lead to social divisions. It also helps us better understand how certain attitudes can become moralized if connected to larger beliefs about right and wrong.
- Dirck de Kleer is a PhD student in Social and Political Science at Bocconi University (Italy), where he studies political behavior and public opinion. His research focuses on understanding how citizens and politicians navigate the boundaries between moderate and extreme political attitudes and behaviors. In other work, he explores the implications of far-right parties in government. He holds an MA from Duke University, where he was a Fulbright Graduate Student (2018-2020).
- Article details: JUNG, JAE-HEE, and SCOTT CLIFFORD. 2024. “Varieties of Values: Moral Values Are Uniquely Divisive.” American Political Science Review, 1-17.
- About the APSA Public Scholarship Program.