Authors: Paul K. Nesselroade, Jr., John K. Williams, & Ruth K. Nam

Journal of Psychology and Christianity, Vol 25(1), Spr 2006. pp. 27-33

Abstract:

A total of 128 participants from a religiously-affiliated institution and 82 from a state university indicated which of two opinions they would choose on four different morally-based topics and five different non-moral topics. Participants also estimated how well they thought they examined both sides of each issue when developing their final opinions and how well another student considered both sides of the issue. Participants from both populations showed a greater level of self-enhancement when their opinion differed from that of the other student and when evaluating moral topics compared to non-moral topics. Furthermore, a significant two-way interaction between issue type and opinion indicated that opinion dissimilarity had a greater self-enhancing effect when considering the moral topics than when considering the non-moral topics, but only for students from the religiously-affiliated school. Results are discussed in terms of different schema used for processing moral vs. non-moral topics, and why this might lead to misunderstandings within the church.