Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-lnqnp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T22:21:20.689Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Moral Credentials, Intergroup Attitudes, and Regulatory Focus Interactively Affect Support for Affirmative Action

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 December 2019

Fanny Lalot Open the ORCID record for Fanny Lalot [Opens in a new window]  and
Juan M. Falomir-Pichastor
Fanny Lalot*
Affiliation:
University of Kent (UK)
Juan M. Falomir-Pichastor
Affiliation:
Université de Genève (Switzerland)
*
*Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Fanny Lalot. University of Kent. School of Psychology. Keynes College, CT2 7NP Canterbury (UK). E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

People generally tend to stay consistent in their attitudes and actions but can feel licensed to act less-than-virtuously when an initial moral action provides an excuse to do so (i.e., moral self-licensing). A handful of studies have tested how relevant initial attitudes moderate the self-licensing effect but yielded mixed findings: Initial attitudes either decrease, increase, or do not influence licensing dynamics. To account for these inconsistent findings, we propose that the effect of attitudes could itself interact with other factors, notably motivational orientation. We conducted two studies taking into account initial attitudes, absence/presence of moral credentials, and participants’ chronic regulatory focus. Drawing from self-completion theory, we expected self-licensing to occur specifically amongst prevention-focused participants holding positive intergroup attitudes. Results supported this prediction. Prevention-focused participants with positive intergroup attitudes supported affirmative action policies to a lesser extent when they had acquired moral credentials, as compared to when they had not (i.e., self-licensing), t(329) = –3.79, p < .001, d = –.42, 95% CI [–.64, –.20]. Additionally, promotion-focused participants holding positive intergroup attitudes supported affirmative action policies to a greater extent when they had acquired moral credentials (i.e., behavioral consistency), t(329) = 2.44, p = .015, d = .27, 95% CI [.05, .49].

Keywords

affirmative actionintergroup attitudesmoral credentialsregulatory focusself-licensing
Type
Research Article
Information
The Spanish Journal of Psychology , Volume 22 , 2019 , E49
Copyright
Copyright © Universidad Complutense de Madrid and Colegio Oficial de Psicólogos de Madrid 2019 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

How to cite this article:

Lalot, F., & Falomir-Pichastor, J. M. (2019). Moral credentials, intergroup attitudes, and regulatory focus interactively affect support for affirmative action. The Spanish Journal of Psychology, 22. e49. Doi:10.1017/sjp.2019.55

References

Baas, M., De Dreu, C. K. W., & Nijstad, B. A. (2011). When prevention promotes creativity: The role of mood, regulatory focus, and regulatory closure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 100(5), 794–809. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0022981CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Blanken, I., van de Ven, N., & Zeelenberg, M. (2015). A meta-analytic review of moral licensing. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 41(4), 540–558. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167215572134CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brendl, C. M., & Higgins, E. T. (1996). Principles of judging valence: What makes events positive or negative? In Zanna, M. P. (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology, Vol. 28. (pp. 95–160). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Browman, A. S., Destin, M., & Molden, D. C. (2017). Identity-specific motivation: How distinct identities direct self-regulation across distinct situations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 113(6), 835–857. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspa0000095CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cesario, J., Grant, H., & Higgins, E. T. (2004). Regulatory fit and persuasion: Transfer from ‘feeling right’. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86(3), 388–404. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.86.3.388CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clot, S., Grolleau, G., & Ibanez, L. (2016). Do good deeds make bad people? European Journal of Law and Economics, 42(3), 491–513. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10657-014-9441-4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Conway, P., & Peetz, J. (2012). When does feeling moral actually make you a better person? Conceptual abstraction moderates whether past moral deeds motivate consistency or compensatory behavior. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 38(7), 907–919. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167212442394CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dutton, D. G., & Lennox, V. L. (1974). Effect of prior “token” compliance on subsequent interracial behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 29(1), 65–71. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0035719CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Effron, D. A., Cameron, J. S., & Monin, B. (2009). Endorsing Obama licenses favoring whites. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 45(3), 590–593. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2009.02.001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Effron, D. A., Miller, D. T., & Monin, B. (2012). Inventing racist roads not taken: The licensing effect of immoral counterfactual behaviors. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 103(6), 916–932. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0030008CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Falomir-Pichastor, J. M., Mugny, G., Frederic, N., Berent, J., & Lalot, F. (2018). Motivation to maintain a nonprejudiced identity: The moderating role of normative context and justification for prejudice on moral licensing. Social Psychology, 49(3), 168–181. https://doi.org/10.1027/1864-9335/a000339CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Falomir-Pichastor, J. M., Mugny, G., Quiamzade, A., & Gabarrot, F. (2008). Motivations underlying attitudes: Regulatory focus and majority versus minority support. European Journal of Social Psychology, 38(4), 587–600. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.494CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Festinger, L. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Fishbach, A., Dhar, R., & Zhang, Y. (2006). Subgoals as substitutes or complements: The role of goal accessibility. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 91(2), 232–242. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.91.2.232CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gollwitzer, P. M., Wicklund, R. A., & Hilton, J. L. (1982). Admission of failure and symbolic self-completion: Extending Lewinian theory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 43(2), 358–371. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.43.2.358CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heider, F. (1946). Attitudes and cognitive organization. The Journal of Psychology, 21, 107–112. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223980.1946.9917275CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Higgins, E. T. (1987). Self-discrepancy: A theory relating self and affect. Psychological Review, 94(3), 319–340. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.94.3.319CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Higgins, E. T. (1997). Beyond pleasure and pain. American Psychologist, 52(12), 1280–1300. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.52.12.1280CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Higgins, E. T., Shah, J., & Friedman, R. (1997). Emotional responses to goal attainment: Strength of regulatory focus as moderator. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72(3), 515–525. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.72.3.515CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Idson, L. C., & Higgins, E. T. (2000). How current feedback and chronic effectiveness influence motivation: Everything to gain versus everything to lose. European Journal of Social Psychology, 30(4), 583–592. https://doi.org/10.1002/1099-0992(200007/08)30:4<583::AID-EJSP9>3.0.CO;2-S3.0.CO;2-S>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kiesler, C. A. (1971). The psychology of commitment. New York, NY: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Koo, M., & Fishbach, A. (2008). Dynamics of self-regulation: How (un)accomplished goal actions affect motivation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 94(2), 183–195. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.94.2.183CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lalot, F., Falomir-Pichastor, J. M., & Quiamzade, A. (2019). Regulatory focus and the self-licensing effect: A motivational account of behavioral consistency and balancing [Manuscript in preparation].Google Scholar
Lalot, F., Quiamzade, A., & Falomir-Pichastor, J. M. (2018). Is regulatory focus related to minimal and maximal standards? Depends how you ask! European Journal of Social Psychology, 48, 174–186. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2314CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lee, A. Y., Keller, P. A., & Sternthal, B. (2010). Value from regulatory construal fit: The persuasive impact of fit between consumer goals and message concreteness. Journal of Consumer Research, 36(5), 735–747. https://doi.org/10.1086/605591CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Longoni, C., Gollwitzer, P. M., & Oettingen, G. (2014). A green paradox: Validating green choices has ironic effects on behavior, cognition, and perception. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 50, 158–165. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2013.09.010CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maechler, M., Rousseeuw, P., Croux, C., Todorov, V., Ruckstuhl, A., Salibian-Barrera, M., … di Palma, M. A. (2018). robustbase: Basic Robust Statistics R package version 0.93–0 [Package tools]. Retrieved from http://CRAN.R-project.org/package=robustbaseGoogle Scholar
Marquardt, M. K., Gantman, A. P., Gollwitzer, P. M., & Oettingen, G. (2016). Incomplete professional identity goals override moral concerns. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 65, 31–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2016.03.001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meijers, M. H. C. (2014). On justifying eco-unfriendly behaviors. Chapter 3: Self-identity and justification. (Published doctoral dissertation), University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands. Retrieved from https://dare.uva.nl/search?metis.record.id=432499Google Scholar
Monin, B., & Miller, D. T. (2001). Moral credentials and the expression of prejudice. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81(1), 33–43. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.81.1.33CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mullen, E., & Monin, B. (2016). Consistency versus licensing effects of past moral behavior. Annual Review of Psychology, 67, 363–385. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-010213-115120CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shah, J., & Higgins, E. T. (2001). Regulatory concerns and appraisal efficiency: The general impact of promotion and prevention. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80(5), 693–705. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.80.5.693CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Susewind, M., & Hoelzl, E. (2014). A matter of perspective: Why past moral behavior can sometimes encourage and other times discourage future moral striving. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 44(3), 201–209. https://doi.org/10.1111/jasp.12214CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Truelove, H. B., Yeung, K. L., Carrico, A. R., Gillis, A. J., & Raimi, K. T. (2016). From plastic bottle recycling to policy support: An experimental test of pro-environmental spillover. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 46, 55–66. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2016.03.004CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Dijk, D., & Kluger, A. N. (2011). Task type as a moderator of positive/negative feedback effects on motivation and performance: A regulatory focus perspective. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 32(8), 1084–1105. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.725CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Lalot and Falomir-Pichastor supplementary material

Lalot and Falomir-Pichastor supplementary material

Download Lalot and Falomir-Pichastor supplementary material(File)
File 27.7 KB