Should or Should Not? Framing and Moral Values in the Acceptance of COVID-19 Norms

Abstract

Following the COVID-19 pandemic, new norms known as the “new normal” were developed and moralized worldwide. Adherence to these moralized norms has been studied as a function of individual differences, such as moral values. Moral Foundations Theory identifies five domains of moral judgment. The Care and Fairness foundations are collectively referred to as the individualizing foundation, while the Ingroup, Authority, and Purity foundations are classified as the binding foundation. However, even when the content of the norms is identical, their effectiveness may depend on how they are presented. Message senders should tailor the communication of norms to align with the values of potential receivers, thereby increasing the likelihood that more individuals will adhere to these norms. This study tested the effects of moral values on the acceptance of moralized norms presented in different frames during the COVID-19 pandemic in Japan. Grounded in the theoretical framework of the Model of Moral Motives, Studies 1a and 1b each investigated a single type of framing—prescriptive in 1a and proscriptive in 1b. In Study 2, we employed the same set of norms as in Study 1 but tested both framing types and incorporated additional control variables. The findings examined whether individuals’ focus on individualizing or binding moral foundations selectively predicted norm acceptance as a function of message framing. The findings suggest that individual moral values moderate acceptance of norms in different frames. This has implications for how message senders reach appropriate targets.