Imagine a dance floor. In this case, the dance partners are the target and judge characteristics, and the dance moves are their interactions that shape the moral circle. Just like a skillful duo on the dance floor, both target and judge characteristics play a significant role in determining whether an entity is considered worthy of moral concern. This study investigates the relative importance of these factors by conducting a variance component analysis. The findings reveal that not only do target and judge characteristics independently influence moral inclusion, but their interactions also have a substantial impact. Understanding the interplay between these factors is crucial for accurately describing moral inclusion. To sum it up, when predicting moral consideration, it’s not just about who is making the judgment or who is being judged, but also how these two factors interact. Get ready to dive into this fascinating research to deepen your understanding of what shapes our moral circle!

Abstract
People’s treatment of others (humans, nonhuman animals, or other entities) often depends on whether they think the entity is worthy of moral concern. Recent work has begun to investigate which entities are included in a person’s moral circle, examining how certain target characteristics (e.g., species category, perceived intelligence) and judge characteristics (e.g., empathy, political orientation) shape moral inclusion. However, the relative importance of target and judge characteristics in predicting moral inclusion remains unclear. When predicting whether a person will deem an entity worthy of moral consideration, how important is it to know who is making the judgment (i.e., characteristics of the judge), who is being judged (i.e., characteristics of the target), and potential interactions between the two factors? Here, we address this foundational question by conducting a variance component analysis of the moral circle. In two studies with participants from the Netherlands, the United States, the United Kingdom, and Australia (N = 836), we test how much variance in judgments of moral concern is explained by between-target differences, between-judge differences, and by the interaction between the two factors. We consistently find that all three components explain substantial amounts of variance in judgments of moral concern. Our findings provide two important insights. First, an increased focus on interactions between target and judge characteristics is needed, as these interactions explain as much variance as target and judge characteristics separately. Second, any theoretical account that aims to provide an accurate description of moral inclusion needs to consider target characteristics, judge characteristics, and their interaction.

Read Full Article (External Site)