Moral superiority : a response and perpetuator to intergroup conflict

Abstract

Morally relevant attitudes and behaviors are intertwined in human conflicts. This dissertational research focused on the role of moral superiority (i.e., a sense that one entity is superior to its counterparts in the moral domain) in intergroup conflicts. I argued that moral superiority functions as a response to the perceived threats arising within intergroup conflicts, and moral superiority could perpetuate intergroup conflicts through its impact on dehumanization and aggression.

To address my research questions, 10 studies (N = 2,253) were conducted. Studies 1 - 5 primarily investigated the association between intergroup conflicts and individuals’ (group-based) moral superiority. The internal process of such a relationship and the downstream consequence of moral superiority were also examined. Study 1 was conducted during the 2019 social movement in Hong Kong. I found that participants’ perceived intergroup conflict positively predicted their moral superiority. Importantly, participants’ perceived threats account for such an association, while symbolic threats play a more prominent role than realistic threats. Additionally, moral superiority could further predict outgroup dehumanization. Study 2 replicated Study 1 using a sample from U.S. during the 2020 presidential election and provided converging evidence. In Study 3, I manipulated intergroup conflict and found that intergroup conflict leads to moral superiority. The mediating role of perceived threats (especially symbolic threats) and the downstream outgroup dehumanization were also detected. To further differentiate the effects of realistic threats versus symbolic threats on moral superiority, in Studies 4 and 5, I directly manipulated the type of threat involved in intergroup conflict. In both studies, I found that intergroup conflict involving symbolic threats triggers greater moral superiority, which further predicted outgroup dehumanization. Studies 1 through 5, thus, converged in supporting that perceived threats, especially symbolic threats, shape people’s moral superiority during intergroup conflict.

Next, Studies 6 through 10 tested whether and why moral superiority would cause responses with the potential of perpetuating intergroup conflicts. Study 6 detected that moral superiority predicts people’s perceived ingroup status, which further predicts outgroup dehumanization. Further, Studies 7 and 8, by manipulating moral superiority using real-world scenarios, replicated the above mediational associations among moral superiority, perceived in-group status, and outgroup dehumanization. In addition, Studies 7 and 8 showed that outgroup dehumanization induced by moral superiority predicts downstream outgroup aggression. Moreover, Study 9 replicated the findings of Studies 7 and 8 using a minimal group paradigm. Finally, Study 10 found that emphasizing an equal intergroup status could limit the effect of moral superiority on outgroup dehumanization and aggression. Therefore, Studies 6 - 10 provided consistent evidence regarding the status-promoting function of moral superiority, which contributes to the outgroup dehumanization following moral superiority.

Together, these findings highlight the significance of moral superiority in understanding intergroup conflicts. Moral superiority is a psychological response to intergroup conflicts. During intergroup conflicts, people feel threatened. To cope with such perceived threats, especially symbolic threats, people develop a strong sense of moral superiority. Moral superiority also induces outgroup dehumanization, which may further perpetuate intergroup conflicts. The theoretical and practical implications of these findings are discussed.