“Built-in moral tilt in the public debate”
A new study from Mälardalen University and the Institute for Futures Studies shows that moral arguments based on care and fairness persuade both social liberals and conservatives in the United States. Arguments about loyalty, authority, and reverence for tradition, on the other hand, influence only conservatives. The results help explain why moral values in many countries gradually move in a more progressive liberal direction, despite a polarized debate climate.
In the experiment, 375 Americans first reported their values and political views. They then took positions on nine moral issues, including military spending, health care, and same-sex marriage. After that, they read short arguments based either on care and fairness, or on loyalty, authority, and reverence for tradition.
Value profiles more decisive than political affiliation
The results showed that arguments about loyalty, authority, and reverence affected conservative participants, while care and fairness persuaded both liberals and conservatives. It was participants’ value profiles—rather than their political affiliation—that determined which arguments gained traction.
“Our values function as filters. Arguments that don’t fit are filtered out, while those that connect to what already exists in our mental frameworks are let through and force us to reassess,” says Fredrik Jansson, Associate Professor of Mathematics at Mälardalen University (MDU), affiliated researcher at the Institute for Futures Studies (IFFS), and lead author of the study.
The researchers argue that this creates a kind of moral imbalance in public debate that over time leads to a shift toward more progressive liberal values, even in polarized societies.
“Built-in moral tilt in the debate”
“There is a built-in moral tilt in the debate: arguments about care and fairness can move both liberals and conservatives, while more conservative arguments mostly persuade those who are already conservative,” says Pontus Strimling, researcher at the Institute for Futures Studies and co-author of the study.
