Left-Right Ideological Differences in Moral Judgments: The Case of Acceptance of Collateral Civilian Killings in War

Abstract

Public sentiment on collateral civilian killings during wartime may crucially impact critical governmental decisions and the trajectory of the conflict itself. Across six studies in Israel and the United States, we examined (1) left-right ideological differences in acceptance of collateral civilian killings across diverse war scenarios and (2) the role of moral values and ideological ingroup norms in underlying them. Conservatives/rightists consistently showed higher acceptance of collateral civilian killings than liberals/leftists, regardless of whether the civilians killed are members of a current rival group or a strategic partner, whether the war involves real-life or fictitious groups, or whether participants are members of the group conducting the killings or mere observers. These ideological differences were mediated by conservatives'/rightists' lower endorsement of individualizing moral foundations but not by their higher endorsement of binding moral foundations. Finally, results suggest that ideological ingroup norms may play an indirect role in shaping these ideological differences.