Morally Reframed Arguments Can Affect Support for Political Candidates

Area of Science:

• Social Psychology
• Political Science
• Persuasion Science

Background:

• Political polarization often leads to rigid partisan stances.
• Persuasive communication can influence political attitudes, but effectiveness varies.
• Moral values play a significant role in shaping political beliefs and behaviors.

Purpose of the Study:

• To investigate the efficacy of moral reframing in reducing political candidate support.
• To test whether messages aligning with a target's moral values but opposing their candidate can decrease support.
• To explore the potential of moral reframing in fostering political acceptance.

Main Methods:

• Two studies were conducted within the context of the 2016 American presidential election.
• Participants (conservatives and liberals) were exposed to messages criticizing their preferred candidate.
• Messages were framed using either conservative-aligned (loyalty) or liberal-aligned (fairness) moral values.

Main Results:

• Conservatives opposing Donald Trump showed decreased support when messages appealed to loyalty values compared to fairness values.
• Liberals opposing Hillary Clinton showed decreased support when messages appealed to fairness values compared to loyalty values.
• Moral reframing effectively reduced support for preferred candidates across partisan groups.

Conclusions:

• Moral reframing can be a potent tool for overcoming partisan rigidity.
• Appealing to a target's moral values, even to argue against their preferred candidate, can decrease support.
• This technique holds potential for increasing political acceptance and dialogue.