The Complex Costs and Benefits of Moral Expression in Modern Life

Abstract: Moral language and moral behavior are often assumed to clarify intentions, reduce uncertainty, and promote cooperation. Yet in practice, invocations of morals can generate dissent, disagreement, and even violence. This symposium consists of five talks, examining how moral expressions by leaders and laypeople produce divergent outcomes, are contingent on the political or cultural context, and relate to emotions shaping political harm. The first paper examines corporate leaders’ expressions of greed during earnings calls, finding that greed expressions increase perceptions of competence while also increasing perceptions of recklessness, leading to offsetting stock market reactions. A second paper finds that individuals who change their moral beliefs are judged as having higher moral character but are punished as less authentic. A third paper finds that partisans often agree on whether speech is biased yet diverge in moral condemnation based on political party identification. A fourth paper identifies schadenfreude as a key emotional driver of political harm, suggesting that conflict is fueled not only by moral outrage but also by specific emotional experiences. Finally, the last paper finds cross-cultural evidence that “half-truths” are judged differently across high- and low-context cultures. Together, these papers suggest that moral signals are strategically interpreted, emotionally charged, and context dependent.

Keywords: morality, communication, social perception, experimental