An examination of the factors reducing moral wrongness judgments based on the relationship regulation theory with the Turkish and American respondents

Building on the Relationship Regulation Theory (Rai & Fiske, 2011) the current research approaches morality as a relationship regulation mechanism regulated by four different relational motivations (unity, hierarchy, equality, proportionality). Also, each culture might build on different motivations while regulating their own social relationships. Seven studies (N=1459) were conducted by collecting data from Turkish (N=926) and American (N= 625) respondents. Results showed that Turkish participants based their moral judgments more strongly on unity and hierarchy motivations in social relationships than American participants (Research 1 TR: N=81, US: N=92); that perceived meta-relational threat mediated the relationship between intentionality and moral wrongness judgments (Study 1 TR: N=93, US: N=107); that Turkish respondents with higher degrees of social desirability conformed to majority judgments but that Americans did not (TR: N=135, US: N=178); that priming effects of moral relativism and objectivism were not effective on moral wrongness judgments while open-mindedness was (TR: N=181, US: N=147, Replication: N= 179). Study 4 was conducted in the Reasoning and Imagination Lab at Trinity College Dublin with the support of a TUBITAK grant. Study 4 (TR: N=165) found that moral wrongness judgments became more lenient when participants thought about counter-factual alternatives, especially under deliberative thinking process however Study 4 (US: N=101) did not distinguish the intuitive and deliberative thinking processes on counterfactual thinking. Implications of all studies for understanding morality are discussed, and avenues for future research are recommended.