A relatively new theory that identifies universal concerns underlying human judgment could be key to helping people with opposing views on an issue coax each other to a different way of thinking, new research suggests. The study tested the effectiveness of pro-environment messages guided by moral foundations theory, which suggests that at least five foundational principles influence our decisions about right and wrong. Researchers wrote two experimental messages that were designed to urge readers to support a move away from fossil fuels as a primary energy source in the United States. The framing of one message appealed to conservative moral foundations (by noting that reliance on foreign resources is a national security concern) and the other drew on moral principles most meaningful to liberals (by citing the need to protect vulnerable citizens from a toxic environment). The overarching finding: The conservative moral message framing was more effective than liberal framing at increasing conservatives’ support for transitioning away from fossil fuels, especially when research participants were told the message came from a conservative source. To view the full article visit OSU.edu.
