Victoria Pringle , Erika N. Carlson , Brian S. Connelly
{"title":"What’s “moral” in moral impressions? Exploring self-other agreement about the trait-specific component of moral impressions","authors":"Victoria Pringle , Erika N. Carlson , Brian S. Connelly","doi":"10.1016/j.jrp.2023.104362","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Moral traits are considered central to interpersonal perception, but moral impressions can be difficult to interpret due to the evaluative and less observable nature of moral traits. In a sample of 266 undergraduates and their close others, we found that evaluative attitudes and method variance constitute a large part of moral impressions, but importantly, that they can be teased apart from substance. Furthermore, we found modest but significant self-other agreement only when method variance was taken into account and that moral trait variance was small compared to method variance. Taken together, we conclude that even though moral impressions in our sample were overwhelmingly explained by method variance, there was also a shared social reality based on trait variance.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":2,"journal":{"name":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0092656623000247","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
Abstract
Moral traits are considered central to interpersonal perception, but moral impressions can be difficult to interpret due to the evaluative and less observable nature of moral traits. In a sample of 266 undergraduates and their close others, we found that evaluative attitudes and method variance constitute a large part of moral impressions, but importantly, that they can be teased apart from substance. Furthermore, we found modest but significant self-other agreement only when method variance was taken into account and that moral trait variance was small compared to method variance. Taken together, we conclude that even though moral impressions in our sample were overwhelmingly explained by method variance, there was also a shared social reality based on trait variance.