Cross-national insights into moral expansiveness: Selective valuation of nature versus humans

Abstract

Previous evidence from limited U.S. samples has shown that people differ in how they morally prioritize the natural world versus human outgroups. Here, we extend these findings by conducting pre-registered secondary analyses of multinational surveys with students (k = 42, N = 7443) and nationally representative samples from the World Values Survey and European Social Survey (k = 86, N = 640,178). Across datasets, at least 25 % of participants reported valuing nature over humans, while about 35 % reported valuing humans over nature. National characteristics explained 5 %-7 % of variance in moral worth attributions, with prioritizing nature over humans associated with higher country-level environmental performance and human development. Valuing nature over humans also predicted stronger pro-environmental attitudes and, to a lesser extent, outgroup bias. However, we found no consistent evidence that valuing nature comes at the expense of valuing humans. These findings underscore the need to refine theories of moral expansiveness.