Limits of rationality? Moral foundations and polarization in attitudes towards diversity in Germany

It will be shown for Germany that polarization in attitudes towards immigration, Islam, claims of minorities, the experience of devaluation of one’s own identity and trust in institutions correspond with differences in moral foundations. According to J. Haidt, differences in moral foundations at least partially explain “why good people are divided by politics and religion.” Moral emotions can severely limit rationality in discourses – and thereby contribute to polarization. Using survey data, these polarizing attitudes will be analyzed as dyadic similarities in a network. Ward clustering and Latent Class Analysis identify two subgroups. Polarization at the group-level is then predicted by using binary logit models of class membership and, as a more direct approach to polarization at the dyadic level, by MRQAP-DSP regressions for valued ties in the similarity network. There are robust negative effects of differences in moral foundations on membership in the ‘open-trusting’ cluster as well as on the similarity in polarizing attitudes, which are robust when controlled for indicators of demography and socio-economic status.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Rationality and Society
Published
2025-03-17
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/10434631251327035
Primary Topic
Intergenerational and Educational Inequality Studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Limits of rationality? Moral foundations and polarization in attitudes towards diversity in Germany

Michael Windzio
Rationality and Society
Intergenerational and Educational Inequality Studies
article

Limits of rationality? Moral foundations and polarization in attitudes towards diversity in Germany

Michael Windzio
article en

Abstract

It will be shown for Germany that polarization in attitudes towards immigration, Islam, claims of minorities, the experience of devaluation of one’s own identity and trust in institutions correspond with differences in moral foundations. According to J. Haidt, differences in moral foundations at least partially explain “why good people are divided by politics and religion.” Moral emotions can severely limit rationality in discourses – and thereby contribute to polarization. Using survey data, these polarizing attitudes will be analyzed as dyadic similarities in a network. Ward clustering and Latent Class Analysis identify two subgroups. Polarization at the group-level is then predicted by using binary logit models of class membership and, as a more direct approach to polarization at the dyadic level, by MRQAP-DSP regressions for valued ties in the similarity network. There are robust negative effects of differences in moral foundations on membership in the ‘open-trusting’ cluster as well as on the similarity in polarizing attitudes, which are robust when controlled for indicators of demography and socio-economic status.

Rationality and SocietyVol. 37(3)
University of Bremen (DE)
Openalex Percentile: Top 94%
Intergenerational and Educational Inequality Studies
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Limits of rationality? Moral foundations and polarization in attitudes towards diversity in Germany — Michael Windzio · Rationality and Society (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS