IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/policy/v51y2018i4d10.1007_s11077-018-9329-1.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Expanding the scope and content of morality policy research: lessons from Moral Foundations Theory

Author

Listed:
  • Raymond Tatalovich

    (Loyola University Chicago)

  • Dane G. Wendell

    (Illinois College)

Abstract

Scholars have not precisely defined morality policy, and Smith (Policy Stud J 30(3):379–395, 2002) urged an empirical taxonomy be used to identify those policies. We argue that Moral Foundations Theory offers a methodology for empirically identifying issues with moral content. We inventory 15 issues in parliamentary studies of “conscience” voting, 14 morality policies in western democracies compiled by Studlar (in: Mooney (ed) The public clash of private values: the politics of morality policy, Chatham House Publishers, New York, 2001), and then survey MFT empirical studies to identify 22 issues with moral content. Based on this universe of 37 issues, three journals are content analyzed to determine the coverage given them and to outline productive lines for future research.

Suggested Citation

  • Raymond Tatalovich & Dane G. Wendell, 2018. "Expanding the scope and content of morality policy research: lessons from Moral Foundations Theory," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 51(4), pages 565-579, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:policy:v:51:y:2018:i:4:d:10.1007_s11077-018-9329-1
    DOI: 10.1007/s11077-018-9329-1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11077-018-9329-1
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11077-018-9329-1?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Goren, Paul & Chapp, Christopher, 2017. "Moral Power: How Public Opinion on Culture War Issues Shapes Partisan Predispositions and Religious Orientations," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 111(1), pages 110-128, February.
    2. David C. Wilson & Paul R. Brewer, 2016. "Do Frames Emphasizing Harm to Age and Racial-Ethnic Groups Reduce Support for Voter ID Laws?," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 97(2), pages 391-406, June.
    3. Donley T. Studlar, 2008. "U.S. Tobacco Control: Public Health, Political Economy, or Morality Policy?," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 25(5), pages 393-410, September.
    4. Timothy J. Ryan, 2017. "No Compromise: Political Consequences of Moralized Attitudes," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 61(2), pages 409-423, April.
    5. Christopher A. Cooper & H. Gibbs Knotts, 2006. "Region, Race, and Support for the South Carolina Confederate Flag," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 87(1), pages 142-154, March.
    6. Dylan S. McLean, 2018. "Gun Talk Online: Canadian Tools, American Values," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 99(3), pages 977-992, September.
    7. Kevin B. Smith & John R. Alford & John R. Hibbing & Nicholas G. Martin & Peter K. Hatemi, 2017. "Intuitive Ethics and Political Orientations: Testing Moral Foundations as a Theory of Political Ideology," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 61(2), pages 424-437, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Dane G. Wendell & Raymond Tatalovich, 2021. "Classifying public policies with Moral Foundations Theory," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 54(1), pages 155-182, March.
    2. Teodóra Szép & Sander Cranenburgh & Caspar Chorus, 2024. "Moral rhetoric in discrete choice models: a Natural Language Processing approach," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 58(1), pages 179-206, February.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Raymond Tatalovich & Donald P. Haider‐Markel, 2022. "Voting on gun rights: Mapping the electoral scope of the pro‐gun constituency in America," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 103(6), pages 1359-1370, November.
    2. Rossen, Isabel & Hurlstone, Mark J. & Dunlop, Patrick D. & Lawrence, Carmen, 2019. "Accepters, fence sitters, or rejecters: Moral profiles of vaccination attitudes," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 224(C), pages 23-27.
    3. Yongjin Choi & Ashley M. Fox, 2022. "Fact‐value framework for adjudicating public health policy debates," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 39(6), pages 820-844, November.
    4. Donley Studlar & Gordon Burns, 2015. "Toward the permissive society? Morality policy agendas and policy directions in Western democracies," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 48(3), pages 273-291, September.
    5. Raphaela Schlicht-Schmälzle & Volha Chykina & Ralf Schmälzle, 2018. "An attitude network analysis of post-national citizenship identities," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(12), pages 1-19, December.
    6. Michael Zakharin & Timothy C Bates, 2021. "Remapping the foundations of morality: Well-fitting structural model of the Moral Foundations Questionnaire," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(10), pages 1-26, October.
    7. Iyigun, Murat & Rubin, Jared & Seror, Avner, 2018. "A Theory of Conservative Revivals," IZA Discussion Papers 11954, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    8. Cullen, Francis T. & Graham, Amanda & Hannan, Kellie & Burton, Alexander L. & Butler, Leah C. & Burton, Velmer S. Jr., 2020. "Catholics and Capital Punishment: Do Pope Francis's Teachings Matter in Policy Preferences?," SocArXiv yv86c, Center for Open Science.
    9. Neugart, Michael & Yildirim, Selen, 2020. "What determines perceived income justice? Evidence from the German TwinLife study," Economics & Human Biology, Elsevier, vol. 36(C).
    10. Iyigun, Murat & Rubin, Jared & Seror, Avner, 2021. "A theory of cultural revivals," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 135(C).
    11. Sjoerd Beugelsdijk & Hester van Herk & Robbert Maseland, 2022. "The Nature of Societal Conflict in Europe; an Archetypal Analysis of the Postmodern Cosmopolitan, Rural Traditionalist and Urban Precariat," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 60(6), pages 1701-1722, November.
    12. Schudson, Michael & Baykurt, Burcu, 2016. "How does a culture of health change? Lessons from the war on cigarettes," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 165(C), pages 289-296.
    13. Gazi Islam, 2020. "Psychology and Business Ethics: A Multi-level Research Agenda," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 165(1), pages 1-13, August.
    14. Nathalie Burlone & Rebecca Grace Richmond, 2018. "Between morality and rationality: framing end-of-life care policy through narratives," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 51(3), pages 313-334, September.
    15. Russel Weaver & Sharmistha Bagchi-Sen, 2015. "Racially Polarized Voting in a Southern U.S. Election: How Urbanization and Residential Segregation Shape Voting Patterns," The Review of Regional Studies, Southern Regional Science Association, vol. 45(1), pages 15-34, Spring.
    16. Patrick Sawyer, 2021. "Populism And Protest Intensity: A Cross-National Analysis," HSE Working papers WP BRP 80/PS/2021, National Research University Higher School of Economics.
    17. DiGiuseppe, Matthew & Del Ponte, Alessandro, 2023. "Bottom-Up Sovereign Debt Preferences," SocArXiv wxr67, Center for Open Science.
    18. Jin Ho Yun & Yaeri Kim & Eun-Ju Lee, 2022. "ERP Study of Liberals’ and Conservatives’ Moral Reasoning Processes: Evidence from South Korea," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 176(4), pages 723-739, April.
    19. Alrababah, Ala & Casalis, Marine & Masterson, Daniel & Hangartner, Dominik & Wehrli, & Weinstein, Jeremy, 2023. "Reducing Attrition in Phone-based Panel Surveys: A Web Application to Facilitate Best Practices and Semi-Automate Survey Workflow," OSF Preprints gyz3h, Center for Open Science.
    20. Shalini Sarin Jain & Shailendra Pratap Jain & Yexin Jessica Li, 2023. "Sustaining Livelihoods or Saving Lives? Economic System Justification in the Time of COVID-19," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 183(1), pages 71-104, February.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:kap:policy:v:51:y:2018:i:4:d:10.1007_s11077-018-9329-1. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.