Higher moral development correlates with lower prejudice

Evidence

Several studies show that high levels of moral development are linked with low levels of prejudice (Davidson & Davidson, 1994) and acceptance of outgroups (Battistich et al., 1995), suggesting that increasing moral development may reduce prejudice. The only study we are aware of that assessed the effects of a moral education program on prejudice found that eighth-grade students who participated in the “Facing History and Ourselves” program (a program that examines moral issues in light of the Holocaust) had significantly lower scores on the modern racism scale than did a control group (Schultz, Barr, & Selman, 2001). — John F. Dovidio, Peter Glick, Laurie A. Rudman, On the Nature of Prejudice, 2679 (#corroborates, via linked claim)

Prejudice is a multifaceted construct that includes not only cognitive but emotional and behavioral processes that are becoming more prominent in research (see Smith & Mackie, ch. 22 this volume). The role of affect has been acknowledged, but rarely studied. Presumably many different emotions come into play when experiencing prejudice, yet we have no widely accepted measures for these. Emotions are more salient and may predict behavior better than cognitions. — John F. Dovidio, Peter Glick, Laurie A. Rudman, On the Nature of Prejudice, 2030 (#complicates, via linked claim)

When explaining, or trying to respond to, the challenges that racism poses in European liberal democracies, we tend to be swayed by either manifestations of unadulterated hostility or unconditional sympathy, whilst, sometimes, forgetting to consider the views and experiences of the decent (tolerant, reasonable) ‘middle’. We are more inclined to believe that the prejudices of the decent ‘middle’ are the outcome of implicit, automatic, unconscious bias. Yet, when one turns to the predicament of Romani people in Europe one observes that the presence of Romanies creates marked moral uneasiness for the vast majority of people who see themselves belonging to the decent ‘middle’. — Cristian Tileagă, The Nature of Prejudice, 36 (#complicates, via linked claim)

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: Modern prejudice fuses moral values with anti-outgroup affect; Moral education programs reduce prejudice indirectly through justice emphasis; Higher moral reasoning correlates with and may lower prejudice. — John F. Dovidio, Peter Glick, Laurie A. Rudman, On the Nature of Prejudice: Fifty Years…, 2679 (+13 more)

Broader Connections

• Higher moral reasoning correlates with and may lower prejudice. #corroborates (0.98) — John F. Dovidio, Peter Glick, Laurie A. Rudman, On the Nature of Prejudice, 2679
• Emotions may predict prejudiced behavior better than cognitions do #complicates (0.75) — John F. Dovidio, Peter Glick, Laurie A. Rudman, On the Nature of Prejudice, 2030
• Prejudice operates by stripping social esteem and moral standing from target groups #complicates (0.74)
• The decent middle’s prejudice is conscious moral unease, not unconscious bias #complicates (0.74) — Cristian Tileagă, The Nature of Prejudice, 36
• Prejudice combines cognitive, motivational, and socialized causes #complicates (0.73) — John F. Dovidio, Peter Glick, Laurie A. Rudman, On the Nature of Prejudice, 126
• Greater prejudice predicts lower collective guilt via justifiability construals #complicates (0.72) — Nyla R. Branscombe and Bertjan Doosje (eds.), Collective Guilt, 453
• Prejudices arising from denying moral worth need societal analysis #complicates (0.72) — Cristian Tileagă, The Nature of Prejudice, 38
• The cognitive revolution redefined prejudice as an attitude, sidelining emotion #complicates (0.72) — John F. Dovidio, Peter Glick, Laurie A. Rudman, On the Nature of Prejudice, 2251
• Prejudice serves dual functions of lowering outgroup worth and boosting ingroup entitlement #complicates (0.71)