IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/zbw/espost/191759.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

To accept or not to accept: Level of moral concern impacts on tolerance of Muslim minority practices

Author

Listed:
  • Hirsch, Magdalena
  • Verkuyten, Maykel
  • Yogeeswaran, Kumar

Abstract

Living with diversity requires that we sometimes accept outgroup practices that we personally disapprove of (i.e., tolerance). Using an experimental design, we examined Dutch majority group members’ tolerance of controversial practices with varying degrees of moral concern, performed by a culturally dissimilar (Muslims) or similar (orthodox Protestant) minority group. Furthermore, we examined whether arguments in favour or against (or a combination of both) the specific practice impacted tolerance. Results indicated that participants expressed less tolerance for provocative practices when it was associated with Muslims than orthodox Protestants, but not when such practices elicit high degrees of moral concern. This indicates that opposition towards specific practices is not just a question of dislike of Muslims, but can involve disapproval of specific practices. Argument framing did not have a consistent effect on the level of tolerance for the practices.

Suggested Citation

  • Hirsch, Magdalena & Verkuyten, Maykel & Yogeeswaran, Kumar, 2019. "To accept or not to accept: Level of moral concern impacts on tolerance of Muslim minority practices," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 58(1), pages 196-210.
    • Handle: RePEc:zbw:espost:191759
    DOI: 10.1111/bjso.12284
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/191759/1/f-21749-full-text-Hirsch-et_al-Accept-v3.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/bjso.12284?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Chong, Dennis & Druckman, James N., 2007. "Framing Public Opinion in Competitive Democracies," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 101(4), pages 637-655, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Schnellenbach, Jan & Schubert, Christian, 2015. "Behavioral political economy: A survey," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 40(PB), pages 395-417.
    2. Midha, Joshua, 2022. "The Cycle of Rule: Existential Risks, Continuity Of Governance, And Conflict-Based Preservation," SocArXiv vc7w9, Center for Open Science.
    3. Fung, Timothy K.F. & Choi, Doo Hun & Scheufele, Dietram A. & Shaw, Bret R., 2014. "Public opinion about biofuels: The interplay between party identification and risk/benefit perception," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 344-355.
    4. Rogers, Todd & Nickerson, David W., 2013. "Can Inaccurate Beliefs about Incumbents be Changed? And Can Reframing Change Votes?," Working Paper Series rwp13-018, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government.
    5. Hawkins, Christopher V. & Chia-Yuan, Yu, 2018. "Voter support for environmental bond referenda," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 193-200.
    6. McComas, Katherine A. & Schuldt, Jonathon P. & Burge, Colleen A. & Roh, Sungjong, 2015. "Communicating about marine disease: The effects of message frames on policy support," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 45-52.
    7. Han, Wenchen & Gao, Shun & Huang, Changwei & Yang, Junzhong, 2022. "Non-consensus states in circular opinion model with repulsive interaction," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 585(C).
    8. Vincenzo Carrieri & Maria De Paola & Francesca Gioia, 2021. "The health-economy trade-off during the Covid-19 pandemic: Communication matters," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(9), pages 1-25, September.
    9. Prendergast, Patrick & Pearson-Merkowitz, Shanna & Lang, Corey, 2019. "The individual determinants of support for open space bond referendums," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 258-268.
    10. Suparna Chaudhry & Marc Dotson & Andrew Heiss, 2021. "Who Cares about Crackdowns? Exploring the Role of Trust in Individual Philanthropy," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 12(S5), pages 45-58, July.
    11. Erika Franklin Fowler & Sarah E. Gollust, 2015. "The Content and Effect of Politicized Health Controversies," The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, , vol. 658(1), pages 155-171, March.
    12. Daniel J. Galvin, 2020. "Let’s not conflate APD with political history, and other reflections on “Causal Inference and American Political Development”," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 185(3), pages 485-500, December.
    13. Carrieri, Vincenzo & De Paola, Maria & Gioia, Francesca, 2020. "The Health-Wealth Trade-off during the COVID-19 Pandemic: Communication Matters," IZA Discussion Papers 13943, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    14. Whittemore, Andrew H. & BenDor, Todd K., 2018. "Talking about density: An empirical investigation of framing," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 181-191.
    15. Zeyar Oo & Yonghong Dai & Yasmine Edderssi & Devkota Dipak & Bandana Singh, 2024. "Media's Perception of China-Myanmar Economic Corridor (CMEC): A Framing Analysis of Media Discourse on Chinese Investments in Myanmar," Studies in Media and Communication, Redfame publishing, vol. 12(3), pages 375-392, September.
    16. Junseop Shim & Chisung Park & Mark Wilding, 2015. "Identifying policy frames through semantic network analysis: an examination of nuclear energy policy across six countries," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 48(1), pages 51-83, March.
    17. Sandra Breux & Jérôme Couture & Nicole Goodman, 2017. "Fewer voters, higher stakes? The applicability of rational choice for voter turnout in Quebec municipalities," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 35(6), pages 990-1009, September.
    18. Lai Si Tsui‐Auch & Dongdong Huang & Jun Jie Yang & Si Zheng Koh, 2022. "Double Trouble: Containing Public Disapproval Arising from an Interplay of Stigmatized Categories," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 59(8), pages 2101-2123, December.
    19. Baccaro, Lucio & Bremer, Björn & Neimanns, Erik, 2020. "Is the euro up for grabs? Evidence from a survey experiment," MPIfG Discussion Paper 20/10, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies.
    20. Cheryl Boudreau & Mathew D. McCubbins, 2008. "Nothing But the Truth? Experiments on Adversarial Competition, Expert Testimony, and Decision Making," Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 5(4), pages 751-789, December.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:zbw:espost:191759. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/zbwkide.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.