Construction and Validation of the Moral Inclusion/Exclusion of Other Groups (MIEG) Scale

Abstract

Moral exclusion is defined as viewing others as lying beyond the boundary within which moral values and rules of justice apply. In contrast, the process of moral inclusion involves the extension of social justice to several social groups. Thus, both moral inclusion and exclusion are a pivotal dimension in the study of social inequalities. Although the concept of moral inclusion/exclusion has a history of more than 20 years, research still lacks accurate instruments for measuring it. In this article, a first version of a scale that measures moral inclusion/exclusion was constructed and validated. The good reliability and correlation indexes found across the samples suggest that MIEG is a good measure for tapping into moral exclusion/inclusion symptoms.

Appendices

Appendix 1: The Moral Inclusion/Exclusion of Other Groups (MIEG) Scale Used in Sample 6

Please specify from 2 to 4 ethnic/cultural groups (apart from your own) who live in the area where you live.

Group 1: ____________

Group 2: ____________

Group 3: ____________

Group 4: ____________

Values held by this group represent a threat to our well-being								Values held by this group represent an opportunity for our well-being
Group 1	+3	+2	+1	0	+1	+2	+3
Group 2	+3	+2	+1	0	+1	+2	+3
Group 3	+3	+2	+1	0	+1	+2	+3
Group 4	+3	+2	+1	0	+1	+2	+3
Members of this group deserve no respect								Members of this group deserve our utmost respect
Group 1	+3	+2	+1	0	+1	+2	+3
Group 2	+3	+2	+1	0	+1	+2	+3
Group 3	+3	+2	+1	0	+1	+2	+3
Group 4	+3	+2	+1	0	+1	+2	+3
It is necessary to avoid any kind of contact with members of this group								It is necessary for all of us to engage in establishing constructive contacts with this group’s members
Group 1	+3	+2	+1	0	+1	+2	+3
Group 2	+3	+2	+1	0	+1	+2	+3
Group 3	+3	+2	+1	0	+1	+2	+3
Group 4	+3	+2	+1	0	+1	+2	+3
I think that members of this group of people are extremely uncivilized								I think that members of this group of people are extremely civilized
Group 1	+3	+2	+1	0	+1	+2	+3
Group 2	+3	+2	+1	0	+1	+2	+3
Group 3	+3	+2	+1	0	+1	+2	+3
Group 4	+3	+2	+1	0	+1	+2	+3

Appendix 2: Means and Standard Deviations of All the Variables Used

Measure	Sample
	1		2		3		4		5		6
	M	SD	M	SD	M	SD	M	SD	M	SD	M	SD
Predictive validity
Blatant prejudice (1, 7)	2.50	1.25							3.13	1.25
Subtle prejudice/Modern racism (1, 7)	3.08	1.37							3.89	1.29	2.67	1.29
SDO (1, 7)	2.32	1.15							2.99	1.20	1.69	.98
Authoritarian submission (1, 7)			2.81	1.20	2.89	.99	2.80	1.20
Post-materialism (1, 4)			3.60	.70			3.53	.78
Generativity (1, 7)											4.45	1.34
Support for democracy (1, 7)					3.65	.45
Support for democratic principles (1, 7)			5.54	1.45			4.72	1.14
Importance given to politics (1, 7)	4.10	1.52	4.79	1.58	5.00	1.47	4.81	1.59	4.16	1.52	4.83	1.34
Political affiliation (1, 10)	4.42	2.01	3.42	2.50	4.83	2.33	3.51	2.46	5.05	2.09	4.07	2.04
Discriminant validity
Scope of justice (1, 7)	4.55	1.33
CLOS SIM (0, 6)	4.97	1.35
CLOS NOTSIM (0, 6)	3.72	2.04
SC world (1, 4)	3.12	.78							3.23	.78
SC Italy (1, 4)	3.60	.71							3.30	.96

1. The numbers in parentheses represent the scale range
2. SDO social dominance orientation, CFC consideration of future consequences, CLOS SIM closeness with groups more similar, CLOS NOTSIM closeness with groups less similar, SC self-categorization