Moral Domains Mediate Public Opinions of Four Immigrant and Minority Labels: Mexican Migrant Farmworkers, Refugees, Hispanic Americans, and Illegal Immigrants Hatton, A. T.,1 Hatton, T. E.,2 & Michael Nielsen3 1 Georgia Southern University 2 Independent Researcher 3 Georgia Southern University Introduction Minority immigrant groups have received attention in political events in recent months due to changes in rules regarding refugee resettlement and migration. One immigrant group that does not receive a great deal of attention is migrant farmworkers. These seasonal workers face a unique set of mental and physical health challenges, and their legal status may cause ambivalence in public reactions to them (Hiott et al., 2008). Some research suggests that migrant farmworkers’ health is negatively affected by acculturation and contact with American culture (Finch, Frank, and Vega, 2004). Previous research (Hatton, Hatton, Swank, & Nielsen, 2017) has found a relationship between political conservatism and feelings toward migrant farmworkers and related migratory and minority groups. More research on public perceptions of this group is necessary to determine how stigma may relate to farmworker mental health. Moral Foundations Theory suggests that political orientation is related to five foundational domains of beliefs regarding morality (Graham et al., 2012). Our study examines the role of these moral foundations play in mediating the relationship between political conservatism and opinions about four semi-overlapping labels used to categorize many Latin American migrants: Mexican Migrant Farmworkers, Refugees, Hispanic Americans, and Illegal Immigrants. Method We obtained a sample of 141 students from introductory psychology classes at a rural Southeastern university (81 females, 59 males, 1 transgender). The mean age of the students was 19.6 (SD = 2.3). Measures Moral Foundations Questionnaire. The MFQ30 is an assessment of level of endorsement of five factors of morality: harm, fairness, loyalty, authority, and purity, that are theorized to correlate with political opinions (Graham et al., 2012). Feelings of Warmth. To measure feelings toward the four labels, a list of 30 people, groups, politicians, brands, and minority groups was presented in random order to participants. Participants were asked, “Please indicate to what degree you feel ‘warm’ or ‘cold’ regarding the following groups, people, and brands.” The scale of “warmth” ranged on a slider from 0-100, with 0 labeled as “Cold” and 100 labeled as “Warm,” with a default of 50. Political Orientation. Participants rated their political orientation on a 1-7 Likert scale (1 = Very Liberal, 2 = Liberal, 3 = Somewhat Liberal, 4 = Moderate, 5 = Somewhat Conservative, 6 = Conservative, 7 = Very Conservative). Results Results, cont. Harm Harm .88 -.27 .70 -.27 Fairness Fairness .04 -.43 .04 .11 Political Orientation (Lib./Cons.) Feelings Toward Hispanics Political Orientation (Lib./Cons.) Feelings Toward Migrant Farmworkers -2.65* (-1.52) -4.14** (-2.92) In-Group Loyalty In-Group Loyalty 1.76** -.20 1.76** -.36 Authority Authority 1.10** -.93 1.10** -.67 .94* .51 .94* .35 Purity Purity Discussion Our finding that political conservatism is related to the moral domains of loyalty, authority, and purity is consistent with previous research (Graham et al., 2012). We found that conservatism is negatively correlated with warmth toward all four groups, and that moral foundations can mediate this relationship in certain cases. One unique finding is that the domains of authority and purity act in opposite ways for conservatives, with purity increasing warm feelings toward the groups and authority decreasing warm feelings toward the groups. This effect was strongest in the case of Refugees. This differential effect may reveal ideological dissonance within American political conservatism. One limitation in this research was a small sample size. This may have influenced the small effect sizes and some correlations approaching, but not reaching, significance (p = .06 and p = .07). We are currently collecting a second wave of data in order to increase the sample size for this study. Harm 1.43* -.27 Fairness .04 -.63 Political Orientation (Lib./Cons.) Feelings Toward Refugees -2.89* (-2.49) In-Group Loyalty 1.76** .31 Authority 1.10** -1.40* .94* 1.05* Purity Harm 1.13 -.27 Fairness .04 .50 References Hiott, A. E., Grzywacz, J. G., Davis, S. W., Quandt, S. A., & Arcury, T. A. (2008). Migrant farmworker stress: Mental health implications. Journal of Rural Health, 24(1), 32-39. Finch, B. K., Frank, R., & Vega, W. A. (2004). Acculturation and acculturation stress: A social-epidemiological approach to Mexican migrant farmworkers’ health. International Migration Review, 38(1), 236-262. Graham, J., Haidt, J., Koleva, S., Motyl, M., Iyer, R., Wojcik, S., & Ditto, P. H. (2012). Moral Foundations Theory: The pragmatic validity of moral pluralism. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 47, 55-130. Hatton, A. T., Hatton, T. E., Swank, C., & Nielsen, M. E. (2017, April). Predictors of attitudes toward migrant farmworkers in two samples. Paper presented at the 63rd Annual Meeting of the Southeastern Psychological Association in Atlanta, GA. Political Orientation (Lib./Cons.) Feelings Toward Illegal Immigrants -8.85** (-6.41**) In-Group Loyalty 1.76** -.97 Authority 1.10** -1.28 .94* 1.03 Purity Presented at the Georgia Southern Psy.D. Clinical Psychology Program 2nd Annual Diversity Fair; Statesboro, GA, 4/7/2017 LEAD AUTHOR EMAIL: ah05440@georgiasouthern.edu