Mapping the Moral Architecture of Effective and Extraordinary Altruism

While global challenges demand both equitable and effective altruism, people often prioritize those nearby and overlook the impact of their prosocial actions. Here, we examined what moral values support altruism that is both equitable (helping others impartially regardless of proximity or group membership) and effective (helping impactfully by maximizing welfare gains). We studied two rare populations: effective altruists (EAs; N = 119), defined by their philosophical commitment to impartiality and maximizing impact, and extraordinary altruists (XAs; N = 65), defined by their real-world decision to donate an organ to a stranger—an act of radical impartiality, though not explicitly impact-maximizing. A demographically similar general population sample (N = 176) served as a comparison group. Participants completed moral measures from pluralistic theories (i.e., Moral Foundations Questionnaire (MFQ), Morality-as-Cooperation Questionnaire (MAC-Q)), along with the Moral Expansiveness Scale (MES), and the Oxford Utilitarianism Scale (OUS). They also completed assessments of equitable, effective, and combined altruistic orientations. Both altruistic groups showed elevated moral expansiveness (MES) and impartial beneficence (OUS) relative to controls. EAs, compared to XAs and controls, more strongly endorsed utilitarian principles (including instrumental harm on the OUS) and deprioritized traditional cooperative values (e.g., reciprocity, deference on the MAC-Q). Familial loyalty (MAC-Q) negatively predicted altruistic orientations across groups. Surprisingly, group loyalty—conceptualized as parochial by pluralistic moral theories—positively predicted equitable and effective altruism across groups, challenging assumptions that parochial values necessarily constrain prosociality. These findings instead suggest inclusive forms of loyalty may help promote altruism that is both equitable and effective.