The DOI matches its Crossref record; 89 of the 91 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Mapping the moral domain.
Open accessAbstract
The moral domain is broader than the empathy and justice concerns assessed by existing measures of moral competence, and it is not just a subset of the values assessed by value inventories. To fill the need for reliable and theoretically grounded measurement of the full range of moral concerns, we developed the Moral Foundations Questionnaire on the basis of a theoretical model of 5 universally available (but variably developed) sets of moral intuitions: Harm/Care, Fairness/Reciprocity, Ingroup/Loyalty, Authority/Respect, and Purity/Sanctity. We present evidence for the internal and external validity of the scale and the model, and in doing so we present new findings about morality: (a) Comparative model fitting of confirmatory factor analyses provides empirical justification for a 5-factor structure of moral concerns; (b) convergent/discriminant validity evidence suggests that moral concerns predict personality features and social group attitudes not previously considered morally relevant; and (c) we establish pragmatic validity of the measure in providing new knowledge and research opportunities concerning demographic and cultural differences in moral intuitions. These analyses provide evidence for the usefulness of Moral Foundations Theory in simultaneously increasing the scope and sharpening the resolution of psychological views of morality.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“MFQ scores have been shown to vary between cultures (Graham et al., 2011) and between social groups within a single culture (Graham et al., 2009).”
From Exploring the psychology of LLMs’ moral and legal reasoning (2024) · cites this paper as Graham et al., 2011
In the citing paper
“When these three distance metrics were applied to our sample of self-reported GPT liberals, we found that first, according to each of the three distance metrics, self-reported GPT liberals had a lower distance to the human liberal sample and a higher distance to the human conservative sample than did the self-reported GPT conservatives.”
From Diminished diversity-of-thought in a standard large language model (2024) · cites this paper as Graham et al. (2011)
In the citing paper
“Just like for self-reported GPT conservatives, the two human samples furthest away from the self-reported GPT liberals were always the liberal sample (furthest away from with respect to cosine similarity metric) and the libertarian sample (furthest away with respect to the L1 and L2 distance metrics).”
From Diminished diversity-of-thought in a standard large language model (2024) · cites this paper as Graham et al. (2011)
In the citing paper
“Also, the L1 distance metric found that self-reported GPT liberals were – among human liberals, human moderates, human conservatives, and human libertarians – closest in response to human conservatives.”
From Diminished diversity-of-thought in a standard large language model (2024) · cites this paper as Graham et al. (2011)
In the citing paper
“The second, arguably more surprising finding was that according to each of the three distance metrics, our sample of self-reported GPT liberals were still closer to the human conservative sample than it was to the human liberal sample.”
From Diminished diversity-of-thought in a standard large language model (2024) · cites this paper as Graham et al. (2011)
In the citing paper
“All three distance metrics found our sample of self-reported GPT conservatives to be most similar to conservative participants of Graham et al. (2011). This was always followed relatively closely by the moderate sample. The two furthest away were always the liberal sample (furthest away with respect to cosine similarity metric) and the libertarian sample (furthest away with respect to the L1 and L”
From Diminished diversity-of-thought in a standard large language model (2024) · cites this paper as Graham et al. (2011)
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Bhagat, R. S., & Hofstede, G. (2002) · Academy of Management Review · doi:10.5465/amr.2002.7389951 · Cited by 21,688
Schwartz, S. H. (1992) · Advances in Experimental Social Psychology · doi:10.1016/s0065-2601(08)60281-6 · Cited by 14,619
The Handbook of Social Psychology
Gravatt, A. E., Lindzey, G. E., & Aronson, F. (1969) · The Family Coordinator · doi:10.2307/582242 · Cited by 12,518
Telling more than we can know: Verbal reports on mental processes.
Nisbett, R. E., & Wilson, T. D. (1977) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.84.3.231 · Cited by 11,317 · cited 1×
“Second, we wanted to supplement the abstract relevance assessments—which, as selftheories about how one makes moral judgments, may be inaccurate with regard to actual moral judgments (Nisbett & Wilson, 1977)—with contextualized items that could more directly gauge actual moral judgments.”
BackgroundThe Evolution of Reciprocal Altruism
Trivers, R. L. (1971) · The Quarterly Review of Biology · doi:10.1086/406755 · Cited by 11,010
In A Different Voice: Psychological Theory And Women's Development
Gilligan, & Carol, C. (1982) · Cited by 10,877
(1976) · Cited by 10,423
Costello, A. B., & Osborne, J. (2005) · University of Massachusetts Amherst · doi:10.7275/jyj1-4868 · Cited by 10,297
Measuring individual differences in empathy: Evidence for a multidimensional approach.
Davis, M. H. (1983) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.44.1.113 · Cited by 10,272
(1973) · DigitalGeorgetown (Georgetown University Library) · Cited by 10,144
Flagged first, then by citations
2 of the 91 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.
Research works printed but not linked: 5
- Haidt J Kesebir S Fiske ST Gilbert D Lindzey G Morality Handbook of Social Psychology 2010 5th Edition Hoboken, NJ Wiley 797 832
- Hofstede G Culture's consequences: Comparing values, behaviors, institutions, and organizations across nations 2001 New York Sage Publications
- James W Pragmatism: A new name for some old ways of thinking and The Meaning of Truth 1907/1998 Cambridge, MA Harvard University Press
- Mill JS On liberty 1859/2003 New Haven, CT Yale University Press
- Singer P Practical ethics 1979 Cambridge Cambridge University Press
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 901–1,000 of 1,006
Moral Character in Negotiation
Morse, L., & Cohen, T. R. (2018) · Academy of Management Perspectives · doi:10.5465/amp.2017.0051 · Cited by 17
O'Grady, T., Vandegrift, D., Wolek, M., & Burr, G. (2019) · Journal of Research in Personality · doi:10.1016/j.jrp.2019.06.008 · Cited by 16
Lewis, P. G. (2019) · Social Sciences · doi:10.3390/socsci8080233 · Cited by 19
Bowey, J. T., Friehs, M. A., & Mandryk, R. L. (2019) · International Conference on the Foundations of Digital Games (FDG) · doi:10.1145/3337722.3337734 · Cited by 19
Morality, Activism and Radicalism in the Brazilian Left and the Brazilian Right
Filho, M. G., & Modesto, J. G. (2019) · Temas em Psicologia · doi:10.9788/tp2019.3-12 · Cited by 16
Sutton, G. W., Kelly, H. L., & Huver, M. E. (2019) · Journal of Psychology and Theology · doi:10.1177/0091647119878675 · Cited by 17
Behnke, A., Strobel, A., & Armbruster, D. (2020) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0235253 · Cited by 18
Orienting to Otherness: Intellectual Humility, Moral Foundations, and Mature Alterity Outcomes
Paine, D. R., Sandage, S. J., Hook, J. N., Davis, D. E., & Johnson, K. A. (2021) · Journal of Psychology and Theology · doi:10.1177/00916471211011603 · Cited by 16
Atav, G., Chatterjee, S., & Roy, R. (2021) · Journal of Consumer Marketing · doi:10.1108/jcm-05-2020-3843 · Cited by 16
Hahn, L. (2021) · Journal of Children and Media · doi:10.1080/17482798.2021.1943475 · Cited by 21
Michaelsen, P., Nyström, L., Luke, T. J., & Hedesström, M. (2021) · Comprehensive Results in Social Psychology · doi:10.1080/23743603.2021.1983720 · Cited by 16
Lay Beliefs about Changes in Financial Well-being Predict Political and Policy Message Preferences
Krijnen, J. M. T., Ülkümen, G., Bogard, J. E., & Fox, C. R. (2020) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/pspp0000392 · Cited by 18
Zakharin, M., & Bates, T. C. (2022) · European Journal of Personality · doi:10.1177/08902070221103957 · Cited by 21
van den Berg, T. G. C., Kroesen, M., & Chorus, C. G. (2022) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2022.817860 · Cited by 19
de Vos, B., van Zomeren, M., Gordijn, E., & Postmes, T. (2016) · Group Processes & Intergroup Relations · doi:10.1177/1368430216674340 · Cited by 16
Are the ethnically tolerant free of discrimination, prejudice and political intolerance?
Bizumić, B., Kenny, A. J., Iyer, R., Tanuwira, J., & Huxley, E. (2017) · European Journal of Social Psychology · doi:10.1002/ejsp.2263 · Cited by 16
Self-citationPrisoners’ ambivalent sexism and domestic violence: a narrative study
Testoni, I., Branciforti, G., Zamperini, A., Zuliani, L., & Nava, F. A. (2019) · International Journal of Prisoner Health · doi:10.1108/ijph-09-2018-0046 · Cited by 16
Katzir, M., Hoffmann, M., & Liberman, N. (2019) · Emotion · doi:10.1037/emo0000480 · Cited by 15
Perceived Shared Condemnation Intensifies Punitive Moral Emotions
Konishi, N., Oe, T., Shimizu, H., Tanaka, K., & Ohtsubo, Y. (2017) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-017-07916-z · Cited by 15
Development and validation of an implicit association test (IAT) for Schwartz's value dimensions
Ye, S. S., Ma, M. Z., Chen, S., Zhou, T., & Chen, X. (2025) · Personality and Individual Differences · doi:10.1016/j.paid.2025.113182 · Cited by 15
Preston, M. C. (2025) · Academy of Management Journal · doi:10.5465/amj.2023.1421 · Cited by 15
Other-serving double standards: People show moral hypercrisy in close relationships
Weiß, A., & Burgmer, P. (2021) · Journal of Social and Personal Relationships · doi:10.1177/02654075211022836 · Cited by 15
Which styles of moral reasoning predict apprehension toward consensual non-monogamy?
CUNNINGHAM, N., Mitchell, R. C., & Mogilski, J. K. (2022) · Personality and Individual Differences · doi:10.1016/j.paid.2022.111732 · Cited by 16
Modelling the ethical priorities influencing decision-making in cybersecurity contexts
Sadeghi, B., Richards, D., Formosa, P., McEwan, M., Bajwa, M. H. A., Hitchens, M., & Ryan, M. (2023) · Organizational Cybersecurity Journal Practice Process and People · doi:10.1108/ocj-09-2022-0015 · Cited by 15
Maftei, A., & Măirean, C. (2023) · Ethics & Behavior · doi:10.1080/10508422.2023.2230505 · Cited by 17
Social context during moral decision-making impacts males more than females
Pilcher, J. J., & Smith, P. D. (2024) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1397069 · Cited by 18
A survey on moral foundation theory and pre-trained language models: current advances and challenges
Zangari, L., Greco, C. M., Picca, D., & Tagarelli, A. (2025) · AI & Society · doi:10.1007/s00146-025-02225-w · Cited by 21
The chronospatial revolution in psychology
Atari, M., Henrich, J., & Schulz, J. (2025) · Nature Human Behaviour · doi:10.1038/s41562-025-02229-y · Cited by 21
Incidental Disgust Increases Adherence to Left-Wing Economic Attitudes
Petrescu, D. C., & Parkinson, B. (2014) · Social Justice Research · doi:10.1007/s11211-014-0221-7 · Cited by 18
On the emotions associated with violations of three moral codes (community, autonomy, divinity)
Kollareth, D., & Russell, J. A. (2017) · Motivation and Emotion · doi:10.1007/s11031-017-9611-0 · Cited by 15
Li, Z., Wu, X., Zhang, L., & Zhang, Z. (2017) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01805 · Cited by 16
Social norms and farm animal protection
Delon, N. (2018) · Humanities and Social Sciences Communications · doi:10.1057/s41599-018-0194-5 · Cited by 15
Moral Intuitions and Suicide Risk: Results from a National Sample of Icelandic Youth*
Silver, E., Silver, J. R., & Sigfúsdóttir, I. D. (2020) · Social Forces · doi:10.1093/sf/soaa078 · Cited by 15
The effect of empathy and context on face-processing ERPs
Clark, G. M., McNeel, C., Bigelow, F. J., & Enticott, P. G. (2020) · Neuropsychologia · doi:10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2020.107612 · Cited by 15
The Representation of Altruism and Egoism in Children’s Books
Tamborini, R., Hahn, L., Klebig, B., Walling, B. M., Kryston, K., & Aley, M. R. (2020) · Communication Studies · doi:10.1080/10510974.2020.1833356 · Cited by 15
It's Not the Flu: Popular Perceptions of the Impact of COVID-19 in the U.S.
Niemi, L., Kniffin, K. M., & Doris, J. M. (2021) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2021.668518 · Cited by 15
Bianco, F., Kosić, A., & Pierro, A. (2021) · Journal of Community and Applied Social Psychology · doi:10.1002/casp.2559 · Cited by 12
Academic Orientation as a Function of Moral Fit: The Role of Individualizing Morality
Goff, K., Silver, E., & Sigfúsdóttir, I. D. (2022) · Sociology of Education · doi:10.1177/00380407211072428 · Cited by 15
People are curious about immoral and morally ambiguous others
Wylie, J., & Gantman, A. P. (2023) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-023-30312-9 · Cited by 15
How the Mind Matters for Morality
Chakroff, A., & Young, L. (2015) · AJOB Neuroscience · doi:10.1080/21507740.2015.1058866 · Cited by 15
Priming social affiliation promotes morality – Regardless of religion
Thomson, N. D. (2014) · Personality and Individual Differences · doi:10.1016/j.paid.2014.11.022 · Cited by 15
Radkiewicz, P. (2016) · Personality and Individual Differences · doi:10.1016/j.paid.2016.04.080 · Cited by 15
Wrong or merely prohibited: Special treatment of strict liability in intuitive moral judgment.
Giffin, C., & Lombrozo, T. (2016) · Law and Human Behavior · doi:10.1037/lhb0000212 · Cited by 18
The moral dimensions of the employment relationship: institutional implications
Lopes, H. (2017) · Journal of Institutional Economics · doi:10.1017/s1744137417000170 · Cited by 18
Three Unresolved Issues in Human Morality
Kagan, J. (2018) · Perspectives on Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/1745691617727862 · Cited by 17
Liberal–conservative dimension of moral concerns underlying political faction formation in Taiwan
Hsu, H., Huang, L., & Hwang, K. (2019) · Asian Journal Of Social Psychology · doi:10.1111/ajsp.12367 · Cited by 15
Cornwell, J. F. M., & Higgins, E. T. (2013) · Journal of Experimental Social Psychology · doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2013.09.007 · Cited by 15
Suicide Stigma in Christian Faith Communities: A Qualitative Study
Mason, K. E. (2021) · Religions · doi:10.3390/rel12070540 · Cited by 14
The Moral Foundations of Desired Cultural Tightness
Santo, D. D., Gelfand, M. J., Baldner, C., & Pierro, A. (2022) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2022.739579 · Cited by 14
Tang, S., Shepherd, S., & Kay, A. C. (2023) · European Journal of Social Psychology · doi:10.1002/ejsp.3001 · Cited by 16
Varieties of Values: Moral Values Are Uniquely Divisive
Jung, J., & Clifford, S. (2024) · American Political Science Review · doi:10.1017/s0003055424000443 · Cited by 16
Jia, G., Ji, W., & Wan, L. C. (2024) · Journal of Travel Research · doi:10.1177/00472875241261623 · Cited by 14
More than law‐abiding: A multi‐staged consumer study on brand morality
Wei, Y., Ekinci, Y., & Sit, J. (2024) · Psychology and Marketing · doi:10.1002/mar.22139 · Cited by 14
Evidence for Vicarious Hope and Vicarious Gratitude
Howell, A. J., Bailie, T., & Buro, K. (2014) · Journal of Happiness Studies · doi:10.1007/s10902-014-9529-0 · Cited by 14
Godless in essence? Psychological essentialism, theistic meta-beliefs, and anti-atheist prejudice
Simpson, A., Morrison, K. R., & Cowgill, C. M. (2017) · Personality and Individual Differences · doi:10.1016/j.paid.2017.06.029 · Cited by 15
Pereira, A. M. (2017) · Restorative Justice · doi:10.1080/20504721.2017.1343420 · Cited by 14
Viđak, M., Buljan, I., Tokalić, R., Lunić, A., Hren, D., & Marušić, A. (2020) · Science and Engineering Ethics · doi:10.1007/s11948-020-00270-w · Cited by 14
Violato, E. M., King, S., & Bulut, O. (2020) · BMC Medical Education · doi:10.1186/s12909-020-02265-4 · Cited by 15
Nonmaleficence in Shaming: The Ethical Dilemma Underlying Participation in Online Public Shaming
Pundak, C., Steinhart, Y., & Goldenberg, J. (2021) · Journal of Consumer Psychology · doi:10.1002/jcpy.1227 · Cited by 16
Neural responses to morally laden interactions in female inmates with psychopathy
Yoder, K. J., Harenski, C. L., Kiehl, K. A., & Jean Decety, A. (2021) · NeuroImage Clinical · doi:10.1016/j.nicl.2021.102645 · Cited by 14
Iacoviello, V., & Spears, R. (2021) · Self and Identity · doi:10.1080/15298868.2021.1933582 · Cited by 16
Moral sensitivity in business: A revised measure
Schmocker, D., Tanner, C., Katsarov, J. W., & Christen, M. (2021) · Current Psychology · doi:10.1007/s12144-021-01926-x · Cited by 15
Deontological Guilt and Disgust Sensitivity Modulate Moral Behaviour.
Parisi, I., Mancini, A., Mancini, F., Aglioti, S. M., & Panasiti, M. S. (2021) · PubMed Central · doi:10.36131/cnfioritieditore20210403 · Cited by 14
Kyung, E. J., Thomas, M., & Krishna, A. (2022) · Journal of the Association for Consumer Research · doi:10.1086/719672 · Cited by 14
Loyalty as a Guide to Organizational Retention: Applying Moral Foundation Theory to Hospitality
McGinley, S. P., & Shi, X. C. (2022) · Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research · doi:10.1177/10963480221085510 · Cited by 14
Heinzelmann, N. C. (2018) · Synthese · doi:10.1007/s11229-018-1762-3 · Cited by 18
When is sensory consumption immoral?
Goenka, S., & Thomas, M. (2022) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/pspp0000450 · Cited by 15
Crone, D. L., & Laham, S. M. (2022) · Social Psychological and Personality Science · doi:10.1177/19485506221136664 · Cited by 14
Do Meditation, Mindfulness, and Self-Compassion Impact Utilitarian Moral Judgment?
Paruzel‐Czachura, M., & Kocur, D. J. (2023) · Mindfulness · doi:10.1007/s12671-023-02161-0 · Cited by 15
Albarello, F., Contu, F., Baldner, C., Vecchione, M., Ellenberg, M. D., Kruglanski, A. W., & Pierro, A. (2023) · International Journal of Intercultural Relations · doi:10.1016/j.ijintrel.2023.101885 · Cited by 14
Nash, K. A., Baumgärtner, T., & Knoch, D. (2017) · Biological Psychology · doi:10.1016/j.biopsycho.2016.12.018 · Cited by 14
Costs of helping only influence children’s intention to help ethnic out-group peers
Sierksma, J. (2018) · Journal of Experimental Child Psychology · doi:10.1016/j.jecp.2018.03.016 · Cited by 14
Political identity, preference, and persuasion
Kim, C. H., Han, D., Duhachek, A., & Tormala, Z. L. (2018) · Social Influence · doi:10.1080/15534510.2018.1518786 · Cited by 15
Cantarero, K., Szarota, P., Stamkou, E., Navas, M., & Espinosa, A. D. C. D. (2018) · Current Psychology · doi:10.1007/s12144-018-9945-0 · Cited by 14
Incorporating Demographic Embeddings Into Language Understanding
Garten, J., Kennedy, B., Hoover, J., Sagae, K., & Dehghani, M. (2019) · Cognitive Science · doi:10.1111/cogs.12701 · Cited by 15
Heinz Welsch, B. (2021) · Ecological Economics · doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2021.107026 · Cited by 15
When (fake) beauty turns ugly: Plastic surgery as a moral violation
Bonell, S., Murphy, S. C., Austen, E., & Griffiths, S. (2020) · Current Psychology · doi:10.1007/s12144-020-01060-0 · Cited by 15
Morality as a Regulator of Divergence: Protecting Against Deviance While Promoting Diversity
Wright, J. C. (2021) · Social Cognition · doi:10.1521/soco.2021.39.1.81 · Cited by 14
Estimating Value Preferences in a Hybrid Participatory System
Siebert, L. C., Liscio, E., Murukannaiah, P. K., Kaptein, L., Spruit, S. L., van den Hoven, J., & Jonker, C. M. (2022) · Frontiers in artificial intelligence and applications · doi:10.3233/faia220193 · Cited by 14
Beyond Left and Right: A Scale to Measure Political Ideology in IndiaPreprint
Puthillam, A., Kapoor, H., & Karandikar, S. (2021) · doi:10.31234/osf.io/fg387 · Cited by 14
Disgust sensitivity is primarily associated with purity-based moral judgmentsPreprint
Wagemans, F. M. A., Brandt, M. J., & Zeelenberg, M. (2017) · PsyArXiv (OSF Preprints) · doi:10.31234/osf.io/tvs2b · Cited by 14
Excavating the Foundations: Cognitive Adaptations for Multiple Moral Domains
Sivan, J., Curry, O. S., & Lissa, C. J. V. (2018) · Evolutionary Psychological Science · doi:10.1007/s40806-018-0154-8 · Cited by 14
Richardson, I., & Conway, P. J. (2022) · European Journal of Social Psychology · doi:10.1002/ejsp.2837 · Cited by 14
How Personal Values Count in Misleading News Sharing with Moral Content
D’Errico, F., Corbelli, G., Papapicco, C., & Paciello, M. (2022) · Behavioral Sciences · doi:10.3390/bs12090302 · Cited by 16
Boine, C. C., Siegel, M., & Maiga, A. (2022) · Injury Epidemiology · doi:10.1186/s40621-022-00394-6 · Cited by 13
Hiding in plain view: An historical perspective on the study of morality in personality psychology
McAdams, D. P., & Mayukha, A. (2023) · Journal of Personality · doi:10.1111/jopy.12808 · Cited by 15
Linking Religious Upbringing to Young Adult Moral Formation
Smith, J. (2023) · Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion · doi:10.1111/jssr.12835 · Cited by 22
High economic inequality is linked to greater moralization
Kirkland, K., Lange, P. A. M. V., Gorenz, D., Blake, K. R., Amiot, C. E., Ausmees, L., Baguma, P., Barry, O., Becker, M., Bilewicz, M., et al. (2024) · PNAS Nexus · doi:10.1093/pnasnexus/pgae221 · Cited by 13
Is pro-environmental effort affected by information about others’ behavior?
Suri, D., Bongers, N., & Kube, S. (2024) · Ecological Economics · doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2024.108437 · Cited by 13
Alper, S. (2018) · Journal of Experimental Social Psychology · doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2018.04.008 · Cited by 15
Empathy, Morality and Social and Emotional Competencies in Interpersonal Interactions Online
Marín‐López, I., Zych, I., Monks, C. P., & Ruiz, R. O. (2019) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-24463-7_11 · Cited by 13
Schnitker, S. A., Ratchford, J. L., & Lorona, R. T. (2019) · The Journal of Positive Psychology · doi:10.1080/17439760.2019.1685572 · Cited by 13
Corruption experiences and attitudes to political, interpersonal, and domestic violence
Gillanders, R., & van der Werff, L. (2021) · Governance · doi:10.1111/gove.12570 · Cited by 13
Silver, J. R. (2020) · Law & Society Review · doi:10.1111/lasr.12487 · Cited by 13
Moral migration: Desires to become more empathic predict changes in moral foundations
Hannikainen, I. R., Hudson, N. W., Chopik, W. J., Briley, D. A., & Derringer, J. L. (2020) · Journal of Research in Personality · doi:10.1016/j.jrp.2020.104011 · Cited by 14
Why moral advocacy leads to polarization and proselytization: The role of self-persuasion
Abeywickrama, R. S., Rhee, J. J.-S., Crone, D. L., & Laham, S. M. (2020) · Journal of Social and Political Psychology · doi:10.5964/jspp.v8i2.1346 · Cited by 14
Latent profile analysis of ethical consumers in the United States and Malaysia
Shim, K., & Cho, H. (2021) · International Journal of Consumer Studies · doi:10.1111/ijcs.12671 · Cited by 14
Ansani, A., Marini, M., Cecconi, C., Dragoni, D., Rinallo, E., Poggi, I., & Mallia, L. (2021) · Psychological Reports · doi:10.1177/00332941211027829 · Cited by 14
Engaging the Dark Side: Exploring Identification with Morally Complex Antagonists
Frazer, R., & Moyer‐Gusé, E. (2021) · Mass Communication & Society · doi:10.1080/15205436.2021.1968436 · Cited by 13
The AI Double Standard: Humans Judge All AIs for the Actions of One
Manoli, A., Pauketat, J. V. T., & Anthis, J. R. (2025) · Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1145/3711083 · Cited by 12
Metadata
- Authors
- Graham, J., Nosek, B. A., Haidt, J., Iyer, R., Koleva, S., & Ditto, P. H.
- Affiliations
- University of Southern California (US)
- University of Virginia (US)
- University of California, Irvine (US)
- Venue
- Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
- Published
- 2011
- Volume
- 101
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 366-385
- ISSN
- 0022-3514 (ISSN-L)
- 1939-1315
- PMC
- PMC3116962
- OpenAlex
- W2096910467
- Cited by
- 2,666
- References
- 91
- Citations by year
- 2026: 169 · 2025: 254 · 2024: 245 · 2023: 242 · 2022: 269 · 2021: 245 · 2020: 212 · 2019: 215 · 2018: 174 · 2017: 157 · 2016: 137 · 2015: 114 · 2014: 92 · 2013: 77 · 2012: 42
- FWCI
- 37.37
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
- Locations
- Journal of Personality and Social Psychology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
- PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
- Funders
- Institute of Education Sciences
- National Institute of Mental Health (R01 MH68447)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Psychology of Moral and Emotional Judgment
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Ethics in Business and Education
- Social Sciences › Education › Values and Moral Education
- Keywords
- moral foundations, Moral Foundations Questionnaire, moral intuitions, harm/care, ingroup loyalty, moral competence, empathy, justice, personality traits, cultural differences in morality, cross-cultural comparison
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Attitude, Female, Humans, Judgment, Male, Morals, Pilot Projects, Surveys and Questionnaires, Social Values, Reproducibility of Results, Intuition
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
