Moral grandstanding in public discourse: Status-seeking motives as a potential explanatory mechanism in predicting conflict

PLoS One. 2019 Oct 16;14(10):e0223749. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0223749. eCollection 2019.

Abstract

Public discourse is often caustic and conflict-filled. This trend seems to be particularly evident when the content of such discourse is around moral issues (broadly defined) and when the discourse occurs on social media. Several explanatory mechanisms for such conflict have been explored in recent psychological and social-science literatures. The present work sought to examine a potentially novel explanatory mechanism defined in philosophical literature: Moral Grandstanding. According to philosophical accounts, Moral Grandstanding is the use of moral talk to seek social status. For the present work, we conducted six studies, using two undergraduate samples (Study 1, N = 361; Study 2, N = 356); a sample matched to U.S. norms for age, gender, race, income, Census region (Study 3, N = 1,063); a YouGov sample matched to U.S. demographic norms (Study 4, N = 2,000); and a brief, one-month longitudinal study of Mechanical Turk workers in the U.S. (Study 5, Baseline N = 499, follow-up n = 296), and a large, one-week YouGov sample matched to U.S. demographic norms (Baseline N = 2,519, follow-up n = 1,776). Across studies, we found initial support for the validity of Moral Grandstanding as a construct. Specifically, moral grandstanding motivation was associated with status-seeking personality traits, as well as greater political and moral conflict in daily life.

Publication types

  • Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

MeSH terms

  • Adolescent
  • Empirical Research
  • Female
  • Humans
  • Longitudinal Studies
  • Male
  • Moral Status*
  • Philosophy
  • Social Media*
  • Social Values
  • Young Adult

Grants and funding

JG, BW, and JT received specific funding from the Charles Koch Foundation to support all studies in this work (No Grant Number available) (https://www.charleskochfoundation.org). This work was also supported by funding from Bowling Green State University. The funder had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.