Similar Moral Values, Different Agendas? U.S. Politicians’ Use of Moral Language Is Issue-Specific
Datos Bibliográficos
| ID | 19217988 |
|---|---|
| Autores | Enrique Muñoz de Cote (0000-0002-3249-096X, University of Toronto, autor de correspondencia), Éloïse Côté (0009-0002-9399-1087, Department of Psychology University of Toronto Toronto Ontario Canada), Sze Yuh Nina Wang (York University), Sze‐Yuh Nina Wang (Department of Science, Glendon College York University North York Ontario Canada), Yoel Inbar (0000-0002-3176-3727, University of Toronto) |
| Año | 2025 |
| Volumen | 47 |
| Número | 3 |
| Fecha de publicación | 2025-03-25 |
| Peer Reviewed | Sí |
| Open Access | Sí |
| Tipo | ARTICLE |
| Revista | Political Psychology (JOURNAL) |
| Identificadores de la revista | ISSN: 0162-895X • E-ISSN: 1467-9221 |
| Editorial | Wiley (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1111/pops.70149 |
| OpenAlex | W4408877341 |
| Idioma | EN |
| Referencias citadas | 53 |
We used Structured Topic Models (STM) combined with a word embedding model to examine U.S. politicians' use of moral language and identify the issues Democrats and Republicans moralize most on X (formerly Twitter). Analyzing 1,578,057 posts from U.S. members of Congress (2019–2023), we found that (1) Democrats and Republicans did not differ meaningfully in what kinds of moral language they used but that (2) they used moral language for different issues. For example, Republicans used language reflecting harm and care to criticize Democratic economic policies, whereas Democrats used it to criticize Trump's immigration policies. These findings suggest that politicians on the right and left rhetorically invoke similar moral values but do so to highlight different issues
Economics · Environmental ethics · Epistemology · Moral disengagement · Political science · Positive economics · Sociology · Academic Freedom and Politics · Philosophy · Psychology · Social Psychology
To Provide or Protect
The Theory of Dyadic Morality
An ideological asymmetry in the diffusion of moralized content on social media among political leaders.
STM
Liberals and Conservatives See Different Victims
Liberals Condemn Sacrilege Too
From Gulf to Bridge
Measuring Moral Rhetoric in Text
Tracing the threads
Do liberals and conservatives use different moral languages? Two replications and six extensions of Graham, Haidt, and Nosek’s (2009) moral text analysis
The strategic use of harm-based moral arguments in the context of women’s bodily autonomy
Structural Topic Models for Open‐Ended Survey Responses
How Words Do the Work of Politics
Competing moral minds? Estimating moral disagreement in American politics
The Social and Political Implications of Moral Conviction
Moral Concerns and Policy Attitudes
Ideological Republicans and Group Interest Democrats
The Mobilizing Effect of Parties' Moral Rhetoric
No Compromise
Lexical Ambiguity in Political Rhetoric
The Moral Roots of Partisan Division
Liberals and conservatives rely on different sets of moral foundations
Moral discourse in the Twitterverse
Mapping the moral domain
From My Cold, Dead Hands
Bias in Perceptions of Public Opinion among Political Elites
Liberals and Conservatives Rely on Very Similar Sets of Foundations When Comparing Moral Violations
| Velocidad de citación | historical |
|---|---|
| Altamente citado | No |