Locomotion concerns with moral usefulness: When liberals endorse binding moral foundations

Moral Foundations Theory has provided a framework for understanding the endorsement of different moral beliefs. Our research investigated whether there are other reasons to endorse moral foundations in addition to epistemic concerns; specifically, the perceived social usefulness of moral foundations. In Study 1, we demonstrate that those showing stronger locomotion concerns for controlling movement tend toward a higher endorsement of binding foundations, and that this effect is stronger among political liberals who otherwise do not typically endorse these foundations. In Study 2, we show that priming participants with assessment concerns (emphasizing truth) rather than locomotion concerns (emphasizing control) reduces the response variance among liberals and also removes the association between locomotion and the binding foundations. In Study 3, we directly ask participants to focus on moral truth versus moral usefulness, with moral truth replicating the Study 2 effect of assessment priming, and moral usefulness replicating the effect of locomotion priming.