Unpackaging gender differences in justifying morally debatable behaviors around the world: The role of personal religiosity and society’s socialization priorities for its children

Abstract

Women generally report greater religiosity and justify morally debatable behaviors less than men. This study examined if personal religiosity mediates the relationship of gender and justification of different types of morally debatable behaviors across societies with diverse religious heritages. We also explored how a society’s endorsement of preferred qualities in the socialization of children would moderate the links between personal religiosity and justification of morally debatable types of behavior. Using the World Values Survey Wave 7 data (47 societies; 66,992 respondents), we identified three types of justifiable behaviors, namely, behaviors threatening human life and family values, dishonest-illegal, and interpersonally violent behaviors. Controlling for age and education, women scored higher in personal religiosity and justified dishonest-illegal and interpersonally violent behaviors less than men, but behaviors threatening human life and family values more than men. Personal religiosity only partially mediated the link between gender and the justification of behaviors threatening human life and family values, indicating that factors other than personal religiosity account for gender differences in justifying types of morally defensible behavior. The linkage strengths of personal religiosity to behaviors threatening human life and family values and dishonest-illegal behaviors were moderated by societal endorsement of preferred qualities in the socialization of children. Thus, both gender and the socialization of a society’s human capital impact on how different types of morally debatable behaviors are justified around the world. Possible explanations for these results are offered and future research directions suggested.