Blaming the unvaccinated during the COVID-19 pandemic: the roles of political ideology and risk perceptions in the USA

Individuals unvaccinated against COVID-19 (C19) experienced prejudice and blame for the pandemic. Because people vastly overestimate C19 risks, we examined whether these negative judgements could be partially understood as a form of scapegoating (ie, blaming a group unfairly for an undesirable outcome) and whether political ideology (previously shown to shape risk perceptions in the USA) moderates scapegoating of the unvaccinated. We grounded our analyses in scapegoating literature and risk perception during C19. We obtained support for our speculations through two vignette-based studies conducted in the USA in early 2022. We varied the risk profiles (age, prior infection, comorbidities) and vaccination statuses of vignette characters (eg, vaccinated, vaccinated without recent boosters, unvaccinated, unvaccinated-recovered), while keeping all other information constant. We observed that people hold the unvaccinated (vs vaccinated) more responsible for negative pandemic outcomes and that political ideology moderated these effects: liberals (vs conservatives) were more likely to scapegoat the unvaccinated (vs vaccinated), even when presented with information challenging the culpability of the unvaccinated known at the time of data collection (eg, natural immunity, availability of vaccines, time since last vaccination). These findings support a scapegoating explanation for a specific group-based prejudice that emerged during the C19 pandemic. We encourage medical ethicists to examine the negative consequences of significant C19 risk overestimation among the public. The public needs accurate information about health issues. That may involve combating misinformation that overestimates and underestimates disease risk with similar vigilance to error.

Prosocial motives underlie scientific censorship by scientists: A perspective and research agenda

Science is among humanity's greatest achievements, yet scientific censorship is rarely studied empirically. We explore the social, psychological, and institutional causes and consequences of scientific censorship (defined as actions aimed at obstructing particular scientific ideas from reaching an audience for reasons other than low scientific quality). Popular narratives suggest that scientific censorship is driven by authoritarian officials with dark motives, such as dogmatism and intolerance. Our analysis suggests that scientific censorship is often driven by scientists, who are primarily motivated by self-protection, benevolence toward peer scholars, and prosocial concerns for the well-being of human social groups. This perspective helps explain both recent findings on scientific censorship and recent changes to scientific institutions, such as the use of harm-based criteria to evaluate research. We discuss unknowns surrounding the consequences of censorship and provide recommendations for improving transparency and accountability in scientific decision-making to enable the exploration of these unknowns. The benefits of censorship may sometimes outweigh costs. However, until costs and benefits are examined empirically, scholars on opposing sides of ongoing debates are left to quarrel based on competing values, assumptions, and intuitions.

Leadership in the eye of the beholder: Follower self-esteem is associated with divergent perceptions of leadership ability for dominant and prestigious leaders

OBJECTIVE

Drawing from dual-strategies theory, leader-member exchange theory, and several theories of self-esteem, we develop and test hypotheses about how followers' self-esteem predicts their perceptions of dominant and prestigious leaders' leadership ability.

METHOD

Across four studies (N = 1568), we tested the association between self-esteem and perceptions of leadership ability for dominant and prestigious leaders.

RESULTS

Individuals with high self-esteem perceived greater leadership ability in prestigious leaders than did those with low self-esteem and individuals with low self-esteem perceived greater leadership ability in dominant leaders than did those with high self-esteem. These results emerged across ratings of leaders from hypothetical vignettes (Studies 1 and 4), abstract beliefs about what constitutes good leadership (Study 1), past personal experiences with leaders (Study 2) and clips of leaders from reality television (Study 3). In Study 4, we also tested potential mechanisms. Compared with followers with low self-esteem, followers with high self-esteem found prestigious leaders more trustworthy, and they anticipated feeling inauthentic around a dominant leader.

CONCLUSIONS

Self-esteem is reliably and robustly related to perceived leadership ability of dominant and prestigious leaders, and these differences might stem from differences in trust in prestigious leaders and anticipated authenticity around dominant leaders.

Worth the Risk? Greater Acceptance of Instrumental Harm Befalling Men than Women

Scientific and organizational interventions often involve trade-offs whereby they benefit some but entail costs to others (i.e., instrumental harm; IH). We hypothesized that the gender of the persons incurring those costs would influence intervention endorsement, such that people would more readily support interventions inflicting IH onto men than onto women. We also hypothesized that women would exhibit greater asymmetries in their acceptance of IH to men versus women. Three experimental studies (two pre-registered) tested these hypotheses. Studies 1 and 2 granted support for these predictions using a variety of interventions and contexts. Study 3 tested a possible boundary condition of these asymmetries using contexts in which women have traditionally been expected to sacrifice more than men: caring for infants, children, the elderly, and the ill. Even in these traditionally female contexts, participants still more readily accepted IH to men than women. Findings indicate people (especially women) are less willing to accept instrumental harm befalling women (vs. men). We discuss the theoretical and practical implications and limitations of our findings.

When Do Observers Deprioritize Due Process for the Perpetrator and Prioritize Safety for the Victim in Response to Information-Poor Allegations of Harm?

We examined how observers assess information-poor allegations of harm (e.g., "my word against yours" cases), in which the outcomes of procedurally fair investigations may favor the alleged perpetrator because the evidentiary standards are unmet. Yet this lack of evidence does not mean no harm occurred, and some observers may be charged with deciding whether the allegation is actionable within a collective. On the basis of theories of moral typecasting, procedural justice, and uncertainty management, we hypothesized that observers would be more likely to prioritize the victim's safety (vs. to prioritize due process for the perpetrator) and view the allegation as actionable when the victim-alleged perpetrator dyad members exhibit features that align with stereotypes of victims and perpetrators. We supported our hypothesis with four studies using various contexts, sources of perceived prototypicality, due-process prioritization, and samples (students from New Zealand, Ns = 137 and 114; Mechanical Turk workers from the United States; Ns = 260 and 336).

Artificial Intelligence Can't Be Charmed: The Effects of Impartiality on Laypeople's Algorithmic Preferences

Over the coming years, AI could increasingly replace humans for making complex decisions because of the promise it holds for standardizing and debiasing decision-making procedures. Despite intense debates regarding algorithmic fairness, little research has examined how laypeople react when resource-allocation decisions are turned over to AI. We address this question by examining the role of perceived impartiality as a factor that can influence the acceptance of AI as a replacement for human decision-makers. We posit that laypeople attribute greater impartiality to AI than human decision-makers. Our investigation shows that people value impartiality in decision procedures that concern the allocation of scarce resources and that people perceive AI as more capable of impartiality than humans. Yet, paradoxically, laypeople prefer human decision-makers in allocation decisions. This preference reverses when potential human biases are made salient. The findings highlight the importance of impartiality in AI and thus hold implications for the design of policy measures.

Incivility Is Rising Among American Politicians on Twitter

We provide the first systematic investigation of trends in the incivility of American politicians on Twitter, a dominant platform for political communication in the United States. Applying a validated artificial intelligence classifier to all 1.3 million tweets made by members of Congress since 2009, we observe a 23% increase in incivility over a decade on Twitter. Further analyses suggest that the rise was partly driven by reinforcement learning in which politicians engaged in greater incivility following positive feedback. Uncivil tweets tended to receive more approval and attention, publicly indexed by large quantities of “likes” and “retweets” on the platform. Mediational and longitudinal analyses show that the greater this feedback for uncivil tweets, the more uncivil tweets were thereafter. We conclude by discussing how the structure of social media platforms might facilitate this incivility-reinforcing dynamic between politicians and their followers.

The dark side of belief in Covid-19 scientists and scientific evidence

We draw from an interdisciplinary literature on convictions to examine the manifestations and consequences of firmly held beliefs in Covid-19 (C19) science. Across three studies (N = 743), we assess participants' beliefs in C19 experts, and beliefs in supported and unsupported empirical evidence. Study 1 establishes the basic theoretical links and we show that an individual's belief in science on C19 is associated with dispositional belief in science and moralization of C19 mitigation measures. Our subsequent two studies show how stronger belief in C19 science influences distrust in unmasked individuals past the mandates, and greater endorsement of pandemic mitigation authoritarianism. We document the dark side that emerges when belief in C19 science extends beyond the generally desirable scientific literacy and manifests as a conviction that public health experts are the only ones who can handle the pandemic, and that even unsupported claims about C19 are supported by scientific evidence (e.g., risk of outdoor transmission is high). We also highlight our political ideology findings showing that both liberals and conservatives mis-calibrate C19 risks in different ways, and we conclude with discussing how examining the darker side of scientific beliefs can inform our understanding of people's reactions to the pandemic.

Dual pathways to bias: Evaluators' ideology and ressentiment independently predict racial discrimination in hiring contexts

Despite organizations' professed commitment to fairness, thousands of employees file race-based discrimination claims every year. The current article examines how people deviate from impartiality when evaluating candidates in hiring decisions. Researchers have argued the ideological endorsement of elitism (i.e., scoring high in social dominance orientation) can lead to discrimination against racial minorities. We examined whether an opposing ideological commitment-egalitarianism-can also produce partiality, but in favor of minority applicants. Inspired by dual processing models and Nietzsche's philosophical theorizing, we also forwarded and tested a novel, affective predictor of racial biases in evaluation: ressentiment toward the socially powerful. Across 4 studies, we found evaluators' ideologies and ressentiment independently shaped evaluations of equally qualified candidates in hiring contexts. Participants who endorsed elitism showed a preference for White candidates, whereas those who endorsed egalitarianism evaluated Black candidates more favorably. Individuals who experienced stronger ressentiment toward the social elite also preferred Black over White applicants. Studies 3 and 4 tested and supported a novel intervention-inducing a calculative mindset-as a method for attenuating evaluators' ideological and ressentiment driven impartiality. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

Signaling virtuous victimhood as indicators of Dark Triad personalities

We investigate the consequences and predictors of emitting signals of victimhood and virtue. In our first three studies, we show that the virtuous victim signal can facilitate nonreciprocal resource transfer from others to the signaler. Next, we develop and validate a victim signaling scale that we combine with an established measure of virtue signaling to operationalize the virtuous victim construct. We show that individuals with Dark Triad traits-Machiavellianism, Narcissism, Psychopathy-more frequently signal virtuous victimhood, controlling for demographic and socioeconomic variables that are commonly associated with victimization in Western societies. In Study 5, we show that a specific dimension of Machiavellianism-amoral manipulation-and a form of narcissism that reflects a person's belief in their superior prosociality predict more frequent virtuous victim signaling. Studies 3, 4, and 6 test our hypothesis that the frequency of emitting virtuous victim signal predicts a person's willingness to engage in and endorse ethically questionable behaviors, such as lying to earn a bonus, intention to purchase counterfeit products and moral judgments of counterfeiters, and making exaggerated claims about being harmed in an organizational context. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

A Social Dilemma Perspective on Cooperative Behavior in Organizations

This study investigates groups' ability to manage resources under high and low scarcity. We offer a contingency model to reconcile competing predictions in the literature: Cooperative group behavior is moderated by group communication and the distribution of resources. A sample of 208 undergraduate students role-played I of 4 "division managers" in a fictional organization. They made independent organizational resource withdrawal decisions. Three independent variables were manipulated: (a) level of resource replenishment, (b) group communication prior to decision making, and (c) access to the resource. Our findings indicated strong support for the hypothesized effect of communication and moderate support for the effect of resource distribution. Results suggest that a decline in scarcity increases cooperation only when groups are allowed to communicate and when there is equal access to resources. Theoretical and practical implications of these findings for group behavior in organizations are discussed, and future directions for research are offered.

When Push doesn't Come to Shove

This article develops the construct of workplace forgiveness by drawing from several relevant literatures. Forgiveness is defined as a process by which an offended worker cognitively acknowledges the wrongfulness of an injurious act and deliberately chooses to release negative emotions and inhibit the desire for revenge. In contrast to revenge, forgiveness may repair damaged workplace relationships in the aftermath of a personal offense. The authors conclude with a research agenda in the form of objectives that provides researchers with a plan for investigating forgiveness.

What makes professors appear credible: The effect of demographic characteristics and ideological beliefs

Five studies are conducted to examine how ideology and perceptions regarding gender, race, caste, and affiliation status affect how individuals judge researchers' credibility. Support is found for predictions that individuals judge researcher credibility according to their egalitarian or elitist ideologies and according to status cues including race, gender, caste, and university affiliation. Egalitarians evaluate low-status researchers as more credible than high-status researchers. Elitists show the opposite pattern. Credibility judgments affect whether individuals will interpret subsequent ambiguous events in accordance with the researcher's findings. Effects of diffuse status cues and ideological beliefs may be mitigated when specific status cues are presented to override stereotypes. (PsycINFO Database Record

Screening for metabolic syndrome in older patients with severe mental illness: Two-years observational study

Introduction

Patients with serious psychiatric illness (SMI) have a reduced quality of life and life expectancy than the general population. Metabolic syndrome (MS) is a clinical aspect determining who should be considered to reduce the risk of serious and chronic organic factors, even more significant in the elderly.

Objectives

To evaluate metabolic screening of elderly patients with severe mental illness (SMI).

Aims

To evaluate the importance of routine screening of metabolic parameters in elderly guests of residential facilities with or without SMI; metabolic screening at baseline and after two of hospitalization.

Methods

Elderly inpatients (44 Tot) with Severe Mental Illness (SMI: bipolar disorder: 34%; schizophrenia: 46%; other: 20%) vs elderly inpatients (78 Tot). Data collected at baseline: psychiatric diagnosis; any previous diagnosis of hypertension, diabetes, dyslipidemia; ECG. At baseline and for two years were administered following scale: BPRS; PANSS; Qli; MMSE, ADL.

Results

After two years metabolic screening has recorded at least one of the new interactions between the five factors of MS (ATP III) in 50% of patients with: one (34%); two (21%); three (11%); four (3%) new altered parameters. In MS inpatients, 53% of new metabolic alterations were recorded in 53% (MS inpatients) vs 23% without MS after two years.

Conclusions

Our results showed a higher frequency of MS in patients with SMI than comparison subjects. Haloperidol was the antipsychotic medication that caused minor impact on the development of metabolic disorders.

Disclosure of interest

The authors have not supplied their declaration of competing interest.

I don't want the money, I just want your time: How moral identity overcomes the aversion to giving time to prosocial causes

Four studies show that moral identity reduces people's aversion to giving time-particularly as the psychological costs of doing so increase. In Study 1, we demonstrate that even when the cost of time and money are held equivalent, a moral cue enhances the expected self-expressivity of giving time-especially when it is given to a moral cause. We found that a moral cue reduces time aversion even when giving time was perceived to be unpleasant (Study 2), or when the time to be given was otherwise seen to be scarce (Study 3). Study 4 builds on these studies by examining actual giving while accounting for the real costs of time. In this study, we found that the chronic salience of moral identity serves as a buffer to time aversion, specifically as giving time becomes increasingly costly. These findings are discussed in terms of the time-versus-money literature and the identity literature. We also discuss policy implications for prosocial cause initiatives. (PsycINFO Database Record

The Moral Ties That Bind . . . Even to Out-Groups: The Interactive Effect of Moral Identity and the Binding Moral Foundations

Throughout history, principles such as obedience, loyalty, and purity have been instrumental in binding people together and helping them thrive as groups, tribes, and nations. However, these same principles have also led to in-group favoritism, war, and even genocide. Does adhering to the binding moral foundations that underlie such principles unavoidably lead to the derogation of out-group members? We demonstrated that for people with a strong moral identity, the answer is “no,” because they are more likely than those with a weak moral identity to extend moral concern to people belonging to a perceived out-group. Across three studies, strongly endorsing the binding moral foundations indeed predicted support for the torture of out-group members (Studies 1a and 1b) and withholding of necessary help from out-group members (Study 2), but this relationship was attenuated among participants who also had a strong moral identity.

When moral identity symbolization motivates prosocial behavior: the role of recognition and moral identity internalization

This article examines the role of moral identity symbolization in motivating prosocial behaviors. We propose a 3-way interaction of moral identity symbolization, internalization, and recognition to predict prosocial behavior. When moral identity internalization is low, we hypothesize that high moral identity symbolization motivates recognized prosocial behavior due to the opportunity to present one's moral characteristics to others. In contrast, when moral identity internalization is high, prosocial behavior is motivated irrespective of the level of symbolization and recognition. Two studies provide support for this pattern examining volunteering of time. Our results provide a framework for predicting prosocial behavior by combining the 2 dimensions of moral identity with the situational factor of recognition.

Moral identity and the experience of moral elevation in response to acts of uncommon goodness

Four studies using survey and experimental designs examined whether people whose moral identity is highly self-defining are more susceptible to experiencing a state of moral elevation after being exposed to acts of uncommon moral goodness. Moral elevation consists of a suite of responses that motivate prosocial action tendencies. Study 1 showed that people higher (vs. lower) in moral identity centrality reported experiencing more intense elevating emotions, had more positive views of humanity, and were more desirous of becoming a better person after reading about an act of uncommon goodness than about a merely positive situation or an act of common benevolence. Study 2 showed that those high in moral identity centrality were more likely to recall acts of moral goodness and experience moral elevation in response to such events more strongly. These experiences were positively related to self-reported prosocial behavior. Study 3 showed a direct effect on behavior using manipulated, rather than measured, moral identity centrality. Study 4 replicated the effect of moral identity on the states of elevation as well as on self-reported physical sensations and showed that the elevation mediates the relationship between moral identity, witnessing uncommon goodness, and prosocial behavior.

Testing a social-cognitive model of moral behavior: the interactive influence of situations and moral identity centrality

This article proposes and tests a social-cognitive framework for examining the joint influence of situational factors and the centrality of moral identity on moral intentions and behaviors. The authors hypothesized that if a situational factor increases the current accessibility of moral identity within the working self-concept, then it strengthens the motivation to act morally. In contrast, if a situational factor decreases the current accessibility of moral identity, then it weakens the motivation to act morally. The authors also expected the influence of situational factors to vary depending on the extent to which moral identity was central to a person's overall self-conception. Hypotheses derived from the framework were tested in 4 studies. The studies used recalling and reading a list of the Ten Commandments (Study 1), writing a story using morally laden terms (Study 4), and the presence of performance-based financial incentives (Studies 2 and 3) as situational factors. Participants' willingness to initiate a cause-related marketing program (Study 1), lie to a job candidate during a salary negotiation (Studies 2 and 3), and contribute to a public good (Study 4) were examined. Results provide strong support for the proposed framework.

Moral identity and psychological distance: the case of adolescent parental socialization

A mediation model using a sample of 1059 adolescents (56% girls; M age=16.02, SD=1.37) tested relations between parenting, adolescent moral identity, and the formation of psychological distance towards others. In short, adolescent moral identity mediated relations between parenting and the ways in which adolescents oriented others in their psychological space. Specifically, adolescent-report parenting style dimensions (responsiveness, autonomy-granting, and demandingness) were positively related to the formation of both private and public moral identity dimensions (internalization and symbolization), which were in turn associated with a tendency to construct psychological distance towards others (negatively with social dominance orientation and positively with the circle of moral regard). Therefore, one way parents may be able to influence how adolescents relate to their peers is by fostering a sense of moral identity in their children through authoritative parenting.

Workplace victimization: aggression from the target's perspective

This article reviews research on workplace victimization, which we define as acts of aggression perpetrated by one or more members of an organization that cause psychological, emotional, or physical harm to their intended target. We compare several types of victimizing behaviors that have been introduced into the organizational psychology literature to illustrate differences and similarities among them. We then review studies looking at who is likely to become a victim of aggression. Predictors include personality, demographic, behavioral, structural, and organizational variables. We also review research on coping strategies for victimization, which include problem-focused and emotion-focused strategies. We conclude with a summary of challenges for victimization research. These include addressing the proliferation of constructs and terms into the literature, attempting to clarify inconclusive findings, and using theory to guide the selection of study variables.

Overcoming Beneficiary Race as an Impediment to Charitable Donations: Social Dominance Orientation, the Experience of Moral Elevation, and Donation Behavior

Three studies examined the relationship between social dominance orientation (SDO), the experience of moral elevation, and Whites' donations to charitable organizations. Study 1 used video clips depicting acts of moral excellence to elicit a state of moral elevation (a distinctive feeling of warmth and expansion, which is accompanied by admiration, affection, and even love for people whose exemplary moral behavior is being observed). Results show that moral elevation increased participants' willingness to donate to a Black-oriented charity and attenuated the negative effect of the group-based dominance (GBD) component of SDO on donation behavior. Studies 2 and 3 replicate and extend these findings by using a written story to elicit a state of moral elevation and examining actual donations to a Black-oriented charity. Results show that moral elevation increased donations to the Black-oriented charity and neutralized the negative influence of GBD.

Self-defeating behaviors in organizations: The relationship between thwarted belonging and interpersonal work behaviors

This multisource field study applied belongingness theory to examine whether thwarted belonging, defined as the perceived discrepancy between one's desired and actual levels of belonging with respect to one's coworkers, predicts interpersonal work behaviors that are self-defeating. Controlling for demographic variables, job type, justice constructs, and trust in organization in a multilevel regression analysis using data from 130 employees of a clinical chemical laboratory and their supervisors, the authors found that employees who perceive greater levels of desired coworker belonging than actual levels of coworker belonging were more likely to engage in interpersonally harmful and less likely to engage in interpersonally helpful behaviors. Implications for the application of belongingness theory to explain self-defeating behaviors in organizations are discussed.

An extension of uncertainty management theory to the self: the relationship between justice, social comparison orientation, and antisocial work behaviors

A multisource field study of 103 employees and their supervisors tested an extension of uncertainty management theory (E. A. Lind & K. Van den Bos, 2002; K. Van den Bos & E. A. Lind, 2002). According to this theory, persons high in social comparison orientation (F. X. Gibbons & B. P. Buunk, 1999) experience chronic uncertainty about the self. It was hypothesized that this should strengthen the effects of interactional and procedural justice perceptions on antisocial work behaviors. As predicted, the negative relationship between employee perceptions of interactional justice and supervisory ratings of antisocial work behaviors was stronger for people who are high as compared with low in social comparison orientation. Results provide evidence for an extension of uncertainty management theory to the self-domain.

Getting even or moving on? Power, procedural justice, and types of offense as predictors of revenge, forgiveness, reconciliation, and avoidance in organizations

A field study and an experimental study examined relationships among organizational variables and various responses of victims to perceived wrongdoing. Both studies showed that procedural justice climate moderates the effect of organizational variables on the victim's revenge, forgiveness, reconciliation, or avoidance behaviors. In Study 1, a field study, absolute hierarchical status enhanced forgiveness and reconciliation, but only when perceptions of procedural justice climate were high; relative hierarchical status increased revenge, but only when perceptions of procedural justice climate were low. In Study 2, a laboratory experiment, victims were less likely to endorse vengeance or avoidance depending on the type of wrongdoing, but only when perceptions of procedural justice climate were high.

A relational model of workplace victimization: social roles and patterns of victimization in dyadic relationships

This article proposes a model of the ways in which dyadic interactions between employees who occupy 1 of 4 archetypal social roles in organizations can lead to either episodic or institutionalized patterns of victimization. The model shows how the occurrence of victimization involving these 4 role types is influenced by organizational variables such as power differences, culture, and access to social capital. The model integrates behavioral and social structural antecedents of victimization to develop a relational perspective on the dynamics of harmful behavior in the workplace.

Overt Anger in Response to Victimization: Attributional Style and Organizational Norms as Moderators

Prior theory and research suggests a positive relation between perceived victimization and overt anger. The authors proposed and tested a theoretical extension of this link by investigating possible moderating effects of individual and contextual variables. A sample of 158 employees of a municipality was used to test hypotheses that the relationship between perceived victimization and overt anger is moderated by hostile attributional style and perceptions of organizational norms. The results showed that the relation between perceptions of direct victimization and overt anger was stronger when the employee had a more rather than less hostile attributional style and when the employee perceived the organizational norms as more rather than less oppositional.

The self-importance of moral identity

Recent theorizing in moral psychology extends rationalist models by calling attention to social and cultural influences (J. Haidt, 2001). Six studies using adolescents, university students, and adults measured the associations among the self-importance of moral identity, moral cognitions, and behavior. The psychometric properties of the measure were assessed through an examination of the underlying factor structure (Study 1) and convergent, nomological, and discriminant validity analyses (Studies 2 and 3). The predictive validity of the instrument was assessed by examinations of the relationships among the self-importance of moral identity, various psychological outcomes, and behavior (Studies 4, 5, and 6). The results are discussed in terms of models of moral behavior, social identity measurement, and the need to consider moral self-conceptions in explaining moral conduct.

The self-importance of moral identity

Recent theorizing in moral psychology extends rationalist models by calling attention to social and cultural influences (J. Haidt, 2001). Six studies using adolescents, university students, and adults measured the associations among the self-importance of moral identity, moral cognitions, and behavior. The psychometric properties of the measure were assessed through an examination of the underlying factor structure (Study 1) and convergent, nomological, and discriminant validity analyses (Studies 2 and 3). The predictive validity of the instrument was assessed by examinations of the relationships among the self-importance of moral identity, various psychological outcomes, and behavior (Studies 4, 5, and 6). The results are discussed in terms of models of moral behavior, social identity measurement, and the need to consider moral self-conceptions in explaining moral conduct.