The Moral Frameworks and Foundations of Contesting Orientations

Area of Science:

• Psychology of Sport
• Moral Psychology
• Sociomoral Theory

Background:

• Contesting theory posits competition is framed as either partnership or war.
• These metaphors imply distinct sociomoral dynamics among competitors.
• Understanding these frames is crucial for analyzing athlete behavior and ethical decision-making.

Purpose of the Study:

• To investigate the relationship between competition metaphors (partnership vs. war) and moral frameworks in intercollegiate athletes.
• To examine how formalist/consequentialist moral frameworks and individualizing/binding moral foundations relate to these competition metaphors.

Main Methods:

• Survey of 610 intercollegiate athletes.
• Correlational analysis to assess relationships between competition metaphors and moral dimensions.
• Multiple regression to identify predictors of partnership and war orientations.

Main Results:

• The partnership approach showed significant correlations with all four moral dimensions (formalist, consequentialist, individualizing, binding).
• The war approach correlated with formalist and consequentialist frameworks, and binding foundations (loyalty, authority, purity).
• Formalist thinking and individualizing foundations predicted partnership; consequentialist thinking and binding foundations predicted war.

Conclusions:

• Athlete conceptualizations of competition are significantly linked to their moral reasoning and foundations.
• A partnership view of competition aligns with fairness and welfare concerns.
• A war view of competition is associated with adherence to in-group loyalty, authority, and purity.