Name:
s41598-023-32711-4.pdf
Size:
2.685Mb
Format:
PDF
Description:
Final Published Version
Author
Atari, M.Mehl, M.R.
Graham, J.
Doris, J.M.
Schwarz, N.
Davani, A.M.
Omrani, A.
Kennedy, B.
Gonzalez, E.
Jafarzadeh, N.
Hussain, A.
Mirinjian, A.
Madden, A.
Bhatia, R.
Burch, A.
Harlan, A.
Sbarra, D.A.
Raison, C.L.
Moseley, S.A.
Polsinelli, A.J.
Dehghani, M.
Affiliation
Department of Psychology, University of ArizonaIssue Date
2023-04-12
Metadata
Show full item recordPublisher
Nature ResearchCitation
Atari, M., Mehl, M.R., Graham, J. et al. The paucity of morality in everyday talk. Sci Rep 13, 5967 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-32711-4Journal
Scientific ReportsRights
© The Author(s) 2023. This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.Collection Information
This item from the UA Faculty Publications collection is made available by the University of Arizona with support from the University of Arizona Libraries. If you have questions, please contact us at repository@u.library.arizona.edu.Abstract
Given its centrality in scholarly and popular discourse, morality should be expected to figure prominently in everyday talk. We test this expectation by examining the frequency of moral content in three contexts, using three methods: (a) Participants’ subjective frequency estimates (N = 581); (b) Human content analysis of unobtrusively recorded in-person interactions (N = 542 participants; n = 50,961 observations); and (c) Computational content analysis of Facebook posts (N = 3822 participants; n = 111,886 observations). In their self-reports, participants estimated that 21.5% of their interactions touched on morality (Study 1), but objectively, only 4.7% of recorded conversational samples (Study 2) and 2.2% of Facebook posts (Study 3) contained moral content. Collectively, these findings suggest that morality may be far less prominent in everyday life than scholarly and popular discourse, and laypeople, presume. © 2023, The Author(s).Note
Open access journalISSN
2045-2322PubMed ID
37045974Version
Final Published Versionae974a485f413a2113503eed53cd6c53
10.1038/s41598-023-32711-4
Scopus Count
Collections
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as © The Author(s) 2023. This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Related articles
- What We Talk About When We Talk About Morality: Deontological, Consequentialist, and Emotive Language Use in Justifications Across Foundation-Specific Moral Violations.
- Authors: Wheeler MA, Laham SM
- Issue date: 2016 Sep
- Morality in everyday life.
- Authors: Hofmann W, Wisneski DC, Brandt MJ, Skitka LJ
- Issue date: 2014 Sep 12
- Social psychology. Comment on "Morality in everyday life".
- Authors: Voelkle MC
- Issue date: 2015 May 15
- Generalized morality culturally evolves as an adaptive heuristic in large social networks.
- Authors: Jackson JC, Halberstadt J, Takezawa M, Liew K, Smith K, Apicella C, Gray K
- Issue date: 2023 Dec
- Shared perceptions: morality is embedded in social contexts.
- Authors: Carnes NC, Lickel B, Janoff-Bulman R
- Issue date: 2015 Mar