Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40206855›Full record

ArticleRoyal Society open science2025

Global directions of change in moral norms: a test of the moral argument theory.

Pontus Strimling, Kimmo Eriksson, Irina Vartanova, Joel Krueger, Isabela Hazin

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Royal Society open science, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Pontus StrimlingInstitute for Futures Studies, Stockholm, Sweden.
Kimmo ErikssonInstitute for Futures Studies, Stockholm, Sweden.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7164-0924
Irina VartanovaInstitute for Futures Studies, Stockholm, Sweden.
Joel KruegerInstitute for Futures Studies, Stockholm, Sweden.
Isabela HazinInstitute for Futures Studies, Stockholm, Sweden.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

How and why are moral norms for various issues changing across the globe? Moral argument theory uniquely addresses these questions by positing that moral norm change is driven by 'individualizing' arguments: concerns about harm, fairness and liberty. We test this theory in a preregistered study of the arguments for both sides of 33 moral issues for which the global directions and rates of norm change were estimated in available longitudinal survey data from 94 societies. We also use available cross-national data to estimate the extent to which each society relies more on individualizing arguments than other kinds of arguments. In support of the theory, norms' justifiability by individualizing arguments was found to predict their global change, and the effect of individualizing arguments on norm change is stronger in societies that rely more strongly on such arguments. These findings demonstrate a fundamental pattern in the contemporary cultural evolution of morality and highlights the key role played by individualizing arguments.

Indexed as

cultural evolutionglobal norm changeindividualizing argumentsmoral argument theorymorality

Identifiers

PMID40206855
PMCPMC11979295

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.