Another fundamental social category? Spontaneous categorization of people who uphold or violate moral norms

Abstract Studies of social categorization have shown that humans robustly categorize others along dimensions of sex, age, kinship, and coalition. Drawing on a functional perspective, we predicted that humans should also categorize others along the dimension of morality (i.e., violating vs. upholding moral norms). In a study employing the memory confusion paradigm, university undergraduate participants ( N  = 39) were presented with same-sex targets randomly matched with sentences indicating violation or upholding of moral norms, and with sentences indicating competence or incompetence. Results showed that participants spontaneously categorized along morality but not along competence, suggesting that morality (beyond general valence) may be an important dimension of social categorization.

[1]  Gordon B. Moskowitz,et al.  On-Line Evidence for Spontaneous Trait Inferences at Encoding , 1996 .

[2]  L Cosmides,et al.  Can race be erased? Coalitional computation and social categorization , 2001, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[3]  Denise C. Park,et al.  Young and Old Adults' Concerns About Morality and Competence , 2001 .

[4]  K. C. Klauer,et al.  Crossed categorization and stereotyping: Structural analyses, effect patterns, and dissociative effects of context relevance☆ , 2003 .

[5]  K C Klauer,et al.  Unraveling social categorization in the "who said what?" paradigm. , 1998, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[6]  Shelley E. Taylor,et al.  Categorical and contextual bases of person memory and stereotyping. , 1978 .

[7]  Riitta Jääskeläinen,et al.  Who Said What? , 2003 .

[8]  Lucy Johnston,et al.  Social categorization and person memory: The pervasiveness of race as an organizing principle , 1991 .

[9]  L. Cosmides.  The logic of social exchange: Has natural selection shaped how humans reason? Studies with the Wason selection task , 1989, Cognition.

[10]  Charles Stangor,et al.  Categorization of individuals on the basis of multiple social features. , 1992 .

[11]  Amy J. C. Cuddy,et al.  Universal dimensions of social cognition: warmth and competence , 2007, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[12]  R. Kurzban,et al.  The family of fundamental social categories includes kinship: Evidence from the memory confusion paradigm , 2008 .

[13]  L. Cosmides,et al.  The psychosemantics of free riding: dissecting the architecture of a moral concept. , 2012, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[14]  Lisa Feldman Barrett,et al.  Individual Differences in Learning the Affective Value of Others under Minimal Conditions Affective Learning We Thank Caroline Cromwell for Her Help with Data Collection, And , 2022 .

[15]  N. Ambady,et al.  Half a minute: Predicting teacher evaluations from thin slices of nonverbal behavior and physical attractiveness. , 1993 .

[16]  Steven L. Neuberg,et al.  A Continuum of Impression Formation, from Category-Based to Individuating Processes: Influences of Information and Motivation on Attention and Interpretation , 1990 .

[17]  Bogdan Wojciszke,et al.  Morality and competence in person- and self-perception , 2005 .

[18]  Gráinne M. Fitzsimons,et al.  Confusing One Instrumental Other for Another: Goal Effects on Social Categorization , 2009, Psychological science.

[19]  Steven L. Neuberg,et al.  Interpersonal Relations and Group Processes What Do People Desire in Others? a Sociofunctional Perspective on the Importance of Different Valued Characteristics , 2022 .

[20]  R. Kurzban,et al.  Evolutionary origins of stigmatization: the functions of social exclusion. , 2001, Psychological bulletin.

[21]  Vladas Griskevicius,et al.  They All Look the Same to Me (Unless They're Angry) , 2006, Psychological science.

[22]  Bogdan Wojciszke,et al.  On the Dominance of Moral Categories in Impression Formation , 1998 .