Abstract
Do clashes between ideologies reflect policy differences or something more fundamental? The present research suggests they reflect core psychological differences such that liberals express compassion toward less structured and more encompassing entities (i.e., universalism), whereas conservatives express compassion toward more well-defined and less encompassing entities (i.e., parochialism). Here we report seven studies illustrating universalist versus parochial differences in compassion. Studies 1a-1c show that liberals, relative to conservatives, express greater moral concern toward friends relative to family, and the world relative to the nation. Studies 2a-2b demonstrate these universalist versus parochial preferences extend toward simple shapes depicted as proxies for loose versus tight social circles. Using stimuli devoid of political relevance demonstrates that the universalist-parochialist distinction does not simply reflect differing policy preferences. Studies 3a-3b indicate these universalist versus parochial tendencies extend to humans versus nonhumans more generally, demonstrating the breadth of these psychological differences.
Highlights
Do clashes between ideologies reflect policy differences or something more fundamental? The present research suggests they reflect core psychological differences such that liberals express compassion toward less structured and more encompassing entities, whereas conservatives express compassion toward more well-defined and less encompassing entities
The results showed conservatism was positively related to love of family, r (3,362) = 0.065, p < 0.001, and negatively related to love of friends, r (3,360) = −0.065, p < 0.001
Seven studies demonstrated that liberals relative to conservatives exhibit universalism relative to parochialism
Summary
Do clashes between ideologies reflect policy differences or something more fundamental? The present research suggests they reflect core psychological differences such that liberals express compassion toward less structured and more encompassing entities (i.e., universalism), whereas conservatives express compassion toward more well-defined and less encompassing entities (i.e., parochialism). Romney prioritized the family unit, whereas Obama highlighted the planet broadly This difference in parochialism versus universalism became exacerbated during the 2016 presidential election, with one article noting, “Trump vs Hillary Is Nationalism vs Globalism, 20161,” contrasting the more parochial Republican candidate with the more universalist Democratic candidate. Others have characterized the Trump administration’s policy decisions as battles between nationalists (typified by parochialism) and globalists (typified by universalism)[2] These differential tendencies toward parochialism and universalism on the political right and left, respectively, extend beyond the United States as well. Universalist moral circles and parochial moral circles in this context are concentric, with one encompassing the other These circles refer to groups of targets toward which one expends moral regard, and reflect the concept of moral circles popularized by Singer[4] (see Burke[5]). While “parochial” sometimes has a negative connotation, we do not imply any such evaluation here and use it to describe maintaining a tight (versus loose) moral circle
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
