Sacred values are measured by refusal to trade a preference for money

Evidence

The measure consists of a list of 62 pairs of opposing statements expressing values (e.g., “I believe in God” vs. “I don’t believe in God”) and preferences (e.g., “I am a Mac” vs. “I am a PC”). For each pair, respondents pick one of the two opposing statements, and are then asked if there is a dollar amount they would accept to switch their position on the given issue. People who refuse this material trade-off are categorized as holding the relevant preference as a sacred value. — Hammad Sheikh and Jeremy Ginges and Alin Coman and Scott Atran, Religion, group threat and sacred values, 24

Categorization

• DEFINE: Provides the operational definition of ‘sacred value’ via the material trade-off refusal test — central to how the threat-to-sacralization hypothesis gets measured.
• XREF: Connects directly to the reader’s question about whether professed conviction predicts actual behavior — the measure was validated against real auctions in Berns et al. 2012, addressing stated-vs-revealed divergence. — connects to: Sacred values resist cost-benefit correction unlike ordinary preferences — Scott Atran, The Devoted Actor: Unconditional…, 4; Sacred values resist trade-offs and override rational self-interest in decision making. — Norenzayan, Ara, Big gods - how religion transformed…, 545; Offering material incentives for sacred-value compromises backfires and increases hostility — Scott Atran and Jeremy Ginges, Sacred Values and Cultural Conflict, 67 (+7 more)

Related

• Sacralized values resist material incentives and cause offer-driven concessions to backfire (similarity 0.86)
• Sacred values resist material incentives and are best countered only by rival sacred values. (similarity 0.85)
• Sacred values resist cost-benefit correction unlike ordinary preferences (similarity 0.85)
• Offering material incentives for sacred-value compromises backfires and increases hostility (similarity 0.84)
• Sacred values resist tradeoffs because communities set them apart as nonfungible moral imperatives. (similarity 0.84)
• Defending sacred values defies material cost-benefit prediction across decision contexts. (similarity 0.83)
• Material incentives for relinquishing sacred values backfire and harden resistance (similarity 0.83)
• Sacred values resist trade-offs and override rational self-interest in decision making. (similarity 0.83)
• Sacred-value defenders benefit materially yet must deny those benefits to stay non-negotiable (similarity 0.82)
• Sacred values engage deontic rule processing, not utilitarian cost-benefit calculation (similarity 0.81)
• Sacred values resist material trade-offs and respond to symbolic meaning (similarity 0.79)
• Symbolic recognition, not material incentives, opens negotiations over sacred values (similarity 0.78)
• Sacred values and resource scarcity create an irreconcilable tension in social life. (similarity 0.78)
• Merely contemplating trade-offs on sacred values provokes moral outrage beyond cognitive confusion (similarity 0.78)

Broader Connections

• Sacred values resist trade-offs and override rational self-interest in decision making. #expands (0.98) — Norenzayan, Ara, Big gods - how religion transformed…, 545
• Genuine moral commitments resist monetary incentives to switch #corroborates (0.98) — Nicolas Baumard, A mutualistic approach to morality, 303
• Sacred values resist cost-benefit correction unlike ordinary preferences #qualifies (0.95) — Scott Atran, The Devoted Actor, 4
• Offering material incentives for sacred-value compromises backfires and increases hostility #expands (0.95) — Scott Atran and Jeremy Ginges, Sacred Values and Cultural Conflict, 67
• Sacralized values resist material incentives and cause offer-driven concessions to backfire #corroborates (0.95) — Hammad Sheikh and Jeremy Ginges and Alin Coman and Scott Atran, Religion, group threat and sacred values, 5
• Material incentives backfire on sacred values while symbolic recognition softens opposition. #expands (0.90) — Norenzayan, Ara, Big gods - how religion transformed…, 547
• Sacred values resist material incentives and are best countered only by rival sacred values. #corroborates (0.90) — Scott Atran, The Devoted Actor, 82
• Sacred-value defenders benefit materially yet must deny those benefits to stay non-negotiable #expands (0.85) — Scott Atran, The Devoted Actor, 60
• Sacred values engage deontic rule processing, not utilitarian cost-benefit calculation #expands (0.80) — Scott Atran and Jeremy Ginges, Sacred Values and Cultural Conflict, 89
• Sacred values are inviolable in conviction yet flexible in application due to interpretive ambiguity #qualifies (0.75) — Norenzayan, Ara, Big gods - how religion transformed…, 549