psyg-09-00418 Ma ch 27, 2018 Time: 17:23 # 1
ORIGINAL RESEARCH
published: 27 Ma ch 2018
doi: 10.3389/ psyg.2018.00418
Edi ed by:
Ma k Hallahan,
College o he Holy C oss,
Uni ed S a es
Re iewed by:
Smada Cohen-Chen,
Uni e si y o Su ey, Uni ed Kingdom
Guille mo B. Willis,
Uni e si y o G anada, Spain
*Co espondence:
Ma cos Dono
[email p o ec ed]
Special y sec ion:
This a icle was submi ed o
Pe sonali y and Social Psychology,
a sec ion o he jou nal
F on ie s in Psychology
Recei ed: 30 Oc obe 2017
Accep ed: 13 Ma ch 2018
Published: 27 Ma ch 2018
Ci a ion:
Sabucedo J-M, Dono M, Alza e M
and Seoane G (2018) The
Impo ance o P o es e s’ Mo als:
Mo al Obliga ion as a Key Va iable
o Unde s and Collec i e Ac ion.
F on . Psychol. 9:418.
doi: 10.3389/ psyg.2018.00418
The Impo ance o P o es e s’
Mo als: Mo al Obliga ion as a Key
Va iable o Unde s and Collec i e
Ac ion
José-Manuel Sabucedo, Ma cos Dono*, Mónica Alza e and Glo ia Seoane
Depa amen o de Psicoloxía Social, Básica e Me odoloxía, Facul ade de Psicoloxía, Uni e sidade de San iago de
Compos ela, San iago de Compos ela, Spain
Collec i e ac ion and p o es ha e become a no malized poli ical beha io ha in many
cases de ines he poli ical agenda. The easons why people ake o he s ee s cons i u e
a cen al subjec wi hin he s udy o social psychology. In he li e a u e, h ee p eceden s
o p o es ha ha e been es ablished as cen al o he s udy o his phenomenon
a e: injus ice, e icacy, and iden i y. Bu poli ical ac ion is also deeply ela ed o mo al
alues. This explains why in ecen yea s some mo al cons uc s ha e also been poin ed
ou as p edic o s o collec i e ac ion. Mo al a iables ha e been in oduced in o he
li e a u e wi h li le conside a ion o how hey ela e o each o he . Thus, wo k in his
di ec ion is needed. The gene al aim o his esea ch is o di e en ia e mo al obliga ion
om mo al no ms and mo al con ic ion, as well as o compa e hei abili y o p edic
collec i e ac ion. In o de o do so, he esea ch objec i es a e: (a) concep ualize and
ope a ionalize mo al obliga ion (S udy 1, N= 171); (b) es i s p edic i e powe o
in en ion o pa icipa e in p o es s (S udy 2, N= 622); and (c) es mo al obliga ion in
a eal con ex (S udy 3, N= 407). Resul s a e encou aging, showing no only ha mo al
obliga ion is di e en o mo al con ic ion and mo al no m, bu also ha i is a mo e
e ec i e p edic o wo king bo h o in en ion and eal pa icipa ion. This wo k he e o e
p esen s mo al obliga ion as a key p eceden o p o es pa icipa ion, p omp ing i s
u u e use as a a iable ha can enhance exis ing p edic i e models o collec i e ac ion.
Resul s ega ding o he a iables a e also discussed.
Keywo ds: ac i ism, collec i e ac ion, mo als, mo al obliga ion, mo al con ic ion, mo al no m, poli ical
pa icipa ion, p o es
INTRODUCTION
Occupy Wall S ee ,Occupy London,Ge açao à Rasca, 15-M indignados... Al hough p o es was
es ablished long ago as one o he mos p e alen o ms o poli ical pa icipa ion, he numbe o
s ee demons a ions du ing he las decade has isen ema kably (K iesi, 2016;Shuman e al.,
2016). The 2008 inancial c isis had g ea impac on collec i e ac ion endencies (Likki, 2014;
Klande mans and an S ekelenbu g, 2016;K iesi, 2016;Sabucedo e al., 2017a) many o hem being
oo ed in an i-sys em claims (Hughes, 2011;Páez e al., 2013). Despi e his inc ease in p o es s
numbe s being closely ela ed o an i-sys em and an i-aus e i y claims, he no maliza ion o p o es
F on ie s in Psychology | www. on ie sin.o g 1Ma ch 2018 | Volume 9 | A icle 418
psyg-09-00418 Ma ch 27, 2018 Time: 17:23 # 2
Sabucedo e al. Mo al Obliga ion and Collec i e Ac ion
ex ends o o he subjec s as well: he A ab Sp ing,
an i-xenophobia ma ches in Sou h A ica in 2013, Hong Kong’s
Umb ella Re olu ion in 2014, o he ecen ly held Women’s
Ma ch in Washing on a he beginning o 2018.
As a cen al ma e in he ield, collec i e ac ion has been
s udied o a long ime, which esul ed in he iden i ica ion and
es ablishmen o a g oup o a iables ha p o ed o be use ul
in he p edic ion o p o es pa icipa ion. Among he a iables
ha s and ou as collec i e ac ion p edic o s we ind: injus ice,
e icacy, and iden i y. These a iables we e i s p oposed by
Gamson (1992) in his wo k abou collec i e ac ion ames and
ha e been de eloped and in eg a ed in o solid p edic i e models
( o u he in o ma ion, see S u me and Simon, 2004; an
Zome en e al., 2004, 2008;Tausch e al., 2011; an S ekelenbu g
and Klande mans, 2013). Successi e s udies on collec i e ac ion
ames de i ed in o wha is in all likelihood he mos widely used
p edic i e model o collec i e ac ion, he SIMCA, ha e icien ly
in eg a es he a iables o iden i y, injus ice, and e icacy ( an
Zome en e al., 2008).
Howe e , poli ics is also a mo al opic which means ha
axiological p inciples could also in luence collec i e ac ion. This
is why in ecen yea s, some engaging app oaches ha poin
owa d he impo ance o people’s mo als as a mo i a o o
pa icipa ion ha e been p oposed. Tha is he case o mo al
con ic ion ( an Zome en e al., 2012;Ski ka e al., 2015) and
mo al obliga ion (Vilas and Sabucedo, 2012;Vilas e al., 2016).
Also, besides his linkage wi h poli ics, mo als had al eady
p o en o mo i a e a di e se ange o human beha io . The mos
p ominen case is ha o mo al no m ha appea s associa ed
o he p edic ion o a wide ange o beha io (Conne e al.,
2003;McMillan and Conne , 2003;Moan and Rise, 2006). In
his sense, and aking in o accoun he impo ance ha mo als
acqui ed in he ield o poli ics, i seems adequa e o wonde i
a concep as widely used in he psychological li e a u e as mo al
no m is also use ul o unde s and collec i e ac ion, o a leas , o
explo e wha ela ionship i has wi h he a o emen ioned mo al
concep s.
The exis ence o all hese concep s ha a e – mo al obliga ion
(Vilas and Sabucedo, 2012) and mo al con ic ion ( an Zome en
e al., 2012;Ski ka e al., 2015) – o may be – mo al no m
(Schwa z, 1973) – ela ed o collec i e ac ion compels us o
explain his ela ionship u he . The e o e, since hese h ee
concep s seem o o e lap, di e en ia ing hem will cla i y how
ele an hey a e as p edic o s o collec i e ac ion. To do so, we
will i s de ine each o he h ee concep s.
Conside ing ha he li e a u e on mo al con ic ion (Ski ka
e al., 2015) poin s owa d a ce ain simila i y wi h he concep
o mo al no m and ha bo h hese cons uc s ha e ecei ed
mo e a en ion in he li e a u e, hey will be discussed join ly and
b ie ly. On he o he hand, since mo al obliga ion has a sho e
ajec o y in he ield and cons i u es he cen al p oposal o his
wo k, we will de o e mo e a en ion o i . Finally, once he h ee
concep s a e de ined, we will discuss hei concep ual di e ences.
Mo al No m and Mo al Con ic ion
The o igins o mo al no m can be acked o he wo k o
Schwa z (1973), whe e he p oposed he concep o pe sonal
no m ( om now on e e ed o as mo al no m, o he sake
o be e comp ehension). The concep ualiza ion o Schwa z’s
mo al no m d aws om Fishbein’s (1967) wo k on a i ude
and he p edic ion o beha io , speci ically om he pe sonal
no ma i e belie concep , de ined as “a belie o whe he he
pa icula ac should o should no be pe o med” (Fishbein,
1967, p. 489). Mo al no m was la e in oduced in he heo y
o planned beha io as an indi idual’s pe cep ion o a speci ic
beha io as mo ally co ec o inco ec (Ajzen, 1991).
In wha e e s o mo al con ic ion, i is a e m o iginally
p oposed by Ski ka e al. (2005). I is de ined as a “me a-cogni i e
belie ha people may ha e abou a gi en a i ude, ha is,
ha he a i ude is g ounded in co e belie s abou igh and
w ong” (Ski ka e al., 2015, p. 41). Despi e he simila i y wi h he
de ini ion o mo al no m, he ac ha mo al con ic ions s and
in a co e posi ion among pe sonal belie s makes o a quali a i e
di e ence be ween hem and ha may be enough o di e en ia e
he wo.
Addi ionally, as al eady no ed, mo al con ic ion does appea
as a use ul p edic i e a iable in he li e a u e o collec i e ac ion
(Ski ka and Wisneski, 2011; an Zome en e al., 2012).
Mo al Obliga ion
P e iously, Vilas and Sabucedo (2012) e e ed o mo al
obliga ion as “a pe sonal decision o pa icipa e in a speci ic
collec i e ac ion based on he belie ha his is wha should be
done” (Vilas and Sabucedo, 2012, p. 371). Re isi ing he concep ,
i seems mo e adequa e o de ine i as a mo i a ional o ce owa d
a ce ain ac ion ha la e could end in a decision o execu e a
beha io .
The heo e ical basis o mo al obliga ion came om Kan ’s
wo k on he ca ego ical impe a i e, an objec i e p inciple ha
mus always be ollowed no ma e he consequences (Johnson
and Cu e on, 2017). In he same ein, Bandu a (1986) men ions
ha on occasion, people beha e based on hei mo al despi e he
ele a ed cos s ha hese ac ions could in ol e. The e o e, a sense
o obliga ion is one o he aspec s o be conside ed when we e e
o mo al obliga ion.
Ano he cha ac e is ic o mo al obliga ion is ha i cons i u es
a s ic ly pe sonal mo i a ion, as i is linked o pe sonal codes o
conduc . In o he wo ds, he need o comply is owa d onesel and
no o he no ma i e sou ces like he e e ence g oup. In his sense,
mo al obliga ion is endowed wi h a sense o au onomy. F om
he momen people execu e hese ac ions eely, and no o ced
by con ex ual demands, hei sel -concep (Higgins, 1989), well-
being (Diene and Diene , 1995), and p ide (T acy and Robins,
2004) a e boos ed. In o he wo ds, hei pe sonal sa is ac ion
inc eases.
Along wi h hese h ee dimensions – sense o obliga ion,
au onomy, and pe sonal sa is ac ion – p e iously posi ed in he
wo k by Vilas and Sabucedo (2012), he e a e wo addi ional
aspec s ha a e ele an o cha ac e ize mo al obliga ion. One
o hem e e s o he cos o no beha ing acco ding o one’s
belie s. The heo y o sel -disc epancy (Higgins, 1987) posi s,
ollowing he classical concep o cogni i e dissonance (Fes inge ,
1957) ha disc epancy be ween belie s and ac ions p oduces
psychological dis ess. Mo e speci ically, Higgins (1987) p oposes
F on ie s in Psychology | www. on ie sin.o g 2Ma ch 2018 | Volume 9 | A icle 418
psyg-09-00418 Ma ch 27, 2018 Time: 17:23 # 3
Sabucedo e al. Mo al Obliga ion and Collec i e Ac ion
ha disc epancies be ween one’s ac ual and ough sel p oduced
guil .
The o he dimension ha should be added o he
concep ualiza ion o mo al obliga ion is ha o sac i ice.
This is o say, people who ac guided by mo al obliga ion may
deal wi h pe sonal sac i ice, one aspec ha was al eady p esen
in Kan ’s wo k (Johnson and Cu e on, 2017). W i ing abou
he oism, Zimba do (2007) s a es ha du y, a concep simila o
ha o he mo al obliga ion, akes p io i y o e high pe sonal
cos s. Cos s depend on he socio-poli ical con ex , bu wha e e
hey a e always implies a ba ie o pa icipa e in poli ical ac ion.
Hence, ou concep ualiza ion o mo al obliga ion comp ehends
hese i e aspec s: sense o obliga ion, au onomy, pe sonal
sa is ac ion, discom o , and sac i ice.
Acco dingly, and ollowing he a gumen s p e iously exposed,
mo al obliga ion can be unde s ood as a pe sonal mo i a ion o
beha e acco ding o a se ies o mo al sel -expec a ions o one’s
conduc , which a he same ime a e de eloped o e a se o
pe sonal alues and ideas.
Concep ual Di e ences Be ween Mo al
No m, Mo al Con ic ion, and Mo al
Obliga ion
The de ini ions o mo al obliga ion, mo al con ic ion, and
mo al no m ha e been discussed, and i can be obse ed
ha hey sha e some cha ac e is ics, as, o ins ance, pe sonal
commi men , whe he ela ed o belie s (mo al no m and mo al
con ic ion) o o ac ions (mo al obliga ion). Howe e , di e ences
be ween hem also exis , and his is o capi al impo ance
since i is wha gi es sense o discussing hei ela ion and
hei po en ially di e en oles in he explana ion o collec i e
ac ion.
Rega ding he di e ences be ween mo al no m and mo al
obliga ion, he de ini ion o no m and obliga ion by The Ox o d
Dic iona y o Philosophy may be a con enien s a ing poin o
his discussion. No m is desc ibed as: “a ule o beha io , o
a de ini e pa e n o beha io , depa u e om which ende s a
pe son liable o some kind o censu e [. . .]”; while obliga ion is
de ined as: “an ac ion ha is equi ed o one” (Blackbu n, 2008,
p. 267).
Taking he abo e men ioned in o accoun , i could be
concluded ha : (a) mo al no m is wha de ines which beha io
is igh and which is w ong and (b) mo al obliga ion is he
mo i a ion el o comply wi h ha mo al no m. In o he
wo ds, and using sel -disc epancy heo y (Higgins, 1987) as a
amewo k, he mo al no ms will be he indi idual’s sel -guides
while mo al obliga ion will be he mo i a ion el o beha e
acco dingly.
Conce ning he ela ionship o mo al no m and mo al
con ic ion, he main di e ence be ween hese wo cons uc s lies
in he cen ali y o he a i ude in ques ion. Mo al con ic ion
is gene ally ega ded as a pa icula ly s ong a i ude based on
mo al con en , which is pe cei ed as nuclea o one’s belie s
(Ski ka and Mo gan, 2014). Acco ding o his, a mo al con ic ion
can be unde s ood as an especially s ong and impo an mo al
no m.
Rega ding he di e ence be ween mo al con ic ion and mo al
obliga ion, i is impo an o keep in mind ha mo al con ic ion
is a special case o mo al no m. The e o e, mo al con ic ions
allude o an indi idual’s sel -guides – in he same way as mo al
no ms do, and mo al obliga ion is he mo i a ion o ac acco ding
o hem. In his case, gi en ha mo al con ic ion is mo e
cen al han mo al no m, mo al obliga ion mus be g ea e when
associa ed o he o me .
The a gumen s exp essed abo e poin owa d hese h ee
concep s clea ly cons i u ing di e en eali ies. Ne e heless, his
a gumen mus be suppo ed by empi ical da a.
Gene al Aims and Hypo heses
The objec i es o he p esen wo k a e as ollows: (1) o de ine
and ope a ionalize he concep o mo al obliga ion, and o
empi ically es he p oposed heo e ical di e ences be ween
mo al obliga ion, mo al con ic ion, and mo al no m, as well as o
analyze he ela ionship be ween hose mo al a iables and hei
alue as p edic i e a iables o poli ical pa icipa ion in en ion
(S udy 1); (2) o es he ole o mo al obliga ion as a p edic o
o in en ion o pa icipa e in collec i e ac ion along wi h he
mos used p edic i e a iables in he li e a u e, hose o he
SIMCA ( an Zome en e al., 2008; S udy 2); and (3) o es mo al
obliga ion’s p edic i e powe in he con ex o eal pa icipa ion
in a demons a ion.
The ini ial hypo heses a e as ollows: (a) mo al obliga ion,
mo al no m, and mo al con ic ion a e h ee di e en eali ies;
(b) he po en ial p edic i e impac o mo al no m and mo al
con ic ion o e he in en ion o pa icipa e in collec i e ac ion
will be media ed by mo al obliga ion; (c) mo al obliga ion
cons i u es he mos e ec i e p edic o o collec i e ac ion
pa icipa ion o he h ee; and (d) he p edic i e ole o mo al
obliga ion will emain o be key e en wi h he p esence o
a iables ha ha e al eady p o en o be e icien p edic o s o
collec i e ac ion.
STUDY 1
In oduc ion
The alida ion o a new measu e o collec i e ac ion ollowing he
concep ual changes sugges ed is he i s objec i e o he p esen
esea ch. This measu e will hen be compa ed o o he s o mo al
con ic ion and mo al no m o es i hey a e di e en cons uc s.
Finally, he h ee o hem will be used o p edic in en ion o
pa icipa e in collec i e ac ion in o de o es which one is he
bes p edic i e a iable.
Me hod
Pa icipan s and P ocedu e
One hund ed and se en y-one (171) Spanish pa icipan s
(150 women; mean age = 20.55) olun a ily comple ed a
ques ionnai e whe e hey we e asked abou hei poli ical opinion
on he basis o a hypo he ical aise in ui ion ees by he
Spanish go e nmen . This p ocedu e was adap ed om an
Zome en e al. (2012). The con ex was gi en by a epo
elabo a ed o he s udy, which s a ed ha a aise in ui ion
F on ie s in Psychology | www. on ie sin.o g 3Ma ch 2018 | Volume 9 | A icle 418
psyg-09-00418 Ma ch 27, 2018 Time: 17:23 # 4
Sabucedo e al. Mo al Obliga ion and Collec i e Ac ion
ees was being conside ed by he go e nmen . This bogus news
i em was included a he beginning o he ques ionnai e. A e
he pa icipan s had comple ed he ques ionnai e, hey we e
deb ie ed and old he news had been ab ica ed o he s udy.
Measu es
Mo al no m
A mo al no m scale was elabo a ed based on measu es ha
assessed he mo al no m h ough he e alua ion o pa icipan ’s
pe cep ion o he igh ness o w ongness o beha io (Conne
e al., 2003;McMillan and Conne , 2003;Moan and Rise, 2006).
Responden s indica ed on a se en-poin scale ( o ally disag ee
o o ally ag ee) hei le el o ag eemen ega ding he igh ness
o ac ing agains he po ayed measu es. The inal measu e
con ained h ee i ems (C onbach’s alpha = 0.73; see Appendix I
o i ems).
Mo al con ic ion
Mo al con ic ion was measu ed wi h a scale om an Zome en
e al. (2012). The scale was composed o ou (C onbach’s
alpha = 0.83) i ems and he sco ing logic was he same as o he
mo al no m scale (see Appendix I).
In en ion o pa icipa e
A se en-i em scale was de eloped based on he wo k o (J. M.
Sabucedo and A ce, 1991; C onbach’s alpha = 0.80). Pa icipan s
we e asked on hei in en ion o pa icipa e h ough di e en
cou ses o ac ion. Fou o he i ems apped con en ional
pa icipa ion (C onbach’s alpha = 0.71), while he o he h ee
apped uncon en ional pa icipa ion (C onbach’s alpha = 0.80).
Again, he sco e sys em was a se en-poin Like scale (1 “ o ally
disag ee” o 7 “ o ally ag ee”).
Resul s
De eloping he Mo al Obliga ion Scale
Based on he ecommenda ions o he Eu opean Fede a ion
o Psychologis s’ Associa ions on es quali y indica o s (E e s
e al., 2012), he scale cons uc ion p ocess began by de ining i s
dimensions om a heo e ical app oach, whe e i was in ended
o ge a mo e exhaus i e mo al obliga ion measu e han p e ious
ones.
This p ocess was done using he Mo al Obliga ion Scale by
Vilas and Sabucedo (2012) as he main e e ence. Based on his
wo k, he dimensions o sense o obliga ion, au onomy, and
pe sonal sa is ac ion a e included. As p e iously men ioned, wo
mo e dimensions we e added o hese h ee. The discom o
caused by no ac ing in acco dance wi h one’s own mo al (S e s
and Ca e , 2012), and sac i ice (Johnson and Cu e on, 2017) a e
he dimensions ha comple e he concep ualiza ion o he Mo al
Obliga ion Scale.
A g oup o h ee expe s was ga he ed and each o hem
was asked o independen ly de elop a o al o i e i ems pe
dimension. The esul ing i ems we e e alua ed and selec ed upon
ag eemen among he same expe s. This esul ed in a o al o 16
i ems (M= 4.47; SD = 1.03; C onbach’s alpha = 0.92) ha we e
la e submi ed o s a is ical il e ing.
Reducing he Mo al Obliga ion Scale
An impo an conce n ega ding he elabo a ion o he Mo al
Obliga ion Scale was i s i o be used in he con ex o a
eal demons a ion. This ci cums ance equi es b ie measu e
ins umen s; he e o e, ob aining a sho scale was a capi al goal
o his s udy.
An explo a o y ac o analysis (EFA) wi h a imax o a ion
was pe o med on he o iginal 16-i em scale. Resul s o his
analysis showed ou ac o s, close o he o iginal concep ha
p oposed i e dimensions o mo al obliga ion. Two i ems we e
selec ed om he i s ac o , which g ouped wo o he o iginal
dimensions – sense o obliga ion and au onomy – and one i em
was selec ed om each o he o he h ee ac o s. This selec ion
was done based on he heo e ical adequacy o he i ems and
hei s a is ical signi icance, while also ying o p ese e each
o he i e heo e ically p oposed dimensions. I em 1 o he
inal scale was selec ed o he dimension o sense o obliga ion,
i em 2 ep esen ed pe sonal sa is ac ion and i em 3 accoun ed
o discom o , i em 4 was selec ed o ea u e in he sac i ice
dimension, and inally i em 5 aps o au onomy. An addi ional
EFA on his scale showed only one ac o , which suppo s he idea
ha he i ems accoun o he same concep o mo al obliga ion.
Addi ionally, a con i ma o y ac o analysis (CFA) pe o med
wi h he SPSS AMOS ool was applied on he esul ing scale.
Resul s showed a good i o he model, beginning wi h a
non-signi ican Chi-squa e s a is ic [χ2(5) = 4.21, p= 0.519].
O he indica o s also accoun ed o a e y good i o he da a:
GFI = 0.99, CFI = 1.00, RMSEA = 0.00, and SRMR = 0.02. Finally,
he eliabili y o his Mo al Obliga ion Scale was es ed, ob aining
a good indica o (C onbach’s alpha = 0.80; see he inal e sion o
he scale on Appendix I) (see Supplemen a y Da a Shee S1 o
he o iginal da a ma ix).
Empi ical Di e ences Be ween: Mo al No m, Mo al
Con ic ion, and Mo al Obliga ion
As p e iously s a ed, he concep s o mo al obliga ion, mo al
no m, and mo al con ic ion we e supposed o be h ee di e en
eali ies. Howe e , i was also heo ized ha hey we e also closely
ela ed. This ela ionship is o be expec ed due o he na u e o he
cons uc s and does no con adic he ac ha he h ee o hem
could be di e en cons uc s. The da a showed such closeness,
co ela ion o mo al obliga ion and mo al con ic ion was ai ly
high ( = 0.627, p<0.001), while he co ela ion be ween mo al
obliga ion and mo al no m was lowe , hough also signi ican
( = 0.414, p<0.001).
Despi e his, heo e ical di e ences we e p oposed ha we e
ough o be empi ically es ed. To do so, an EFA was pe o med
o e he i ems o he h ee cons uc s. The esul s o his analysis
showed h ee clea ly di e en ac o s, which comp ised each o
he i ems o he o iginal scales (see Table 1).
A CFA was also execu ed o es he hypo hesized model
o med by he h ee di e en ia ed cons uc s o mo al obliga ion,
mo al con ic ion, and mo al no m (see Figu e 1). Resul s o he
analysis showed a good i al hough he Chi-squa ed es was
s a is ically signi ican [χ2(51) = 80.70, p= 0.005]. The ac ha
Chi-squa e was signi ican equi es he use o o he indica o s
o assess he i o he model; hose indica o s showed a good
F on ie s in Psychology | www. on ie sin.o g 4Ma ch 2018 | Volume 9 | A icle 418
psyg-09-00418 Ma ch 27, 2018 Time: 17:23 # 5
Sabucedo e al. Mo al Obliga ion and Collec i e Ac ion
TABLE 1 | Fac o loadings o he mo al scale i ems.
Componen
1 2 3
Mo al Obliga ion_1 0.752 0.215 0.194
Mo al Obliga ion_5 0.729 0.374 0.216
Mo al Obliga ion_3 0.682 0.272 0.180
Mo al Obliga ion_2 0.669 – 0.162
Mo al Obliga ion_4 0.608 0.363 –
Mo al Con ic ion_2 0.246 0.871 –
Mo al Con ic ion_1 0.121 0.867 0.150
Mo al Con ic ion_3 0.281 0.702 0.188
Mo al Con ic ion_4 0.427 0.625 –
Mo al No m_2 0.109 – 0.908
Mo al No m_1 0.255 – 0.860
Mo al No m_3 0.141 – 0.640
Fac o loadings unde 0.10 a e no displayed.
i o he model: GFI = 0.92, CFI = 0.96, RMSEA = 0.059,
and SRMR = 0.05. These da a indica e ha mo al obliga ion,
mo al no m, and mo al con ic ion a e indeed dis inc . An
al e na i e model was es ed, whe e all he a iables om he
h ee cons uc s loaded in o a single cons uc . This was done as
i was unde s ood o be he con e se scena io o he one o me ly
es ed. The i o ha model was poo , sugges ing ha all he
i ems did no o m a single cons uc : GFI = 0.74; CFI = 0.67;
RMSEA = 0.17; and SRMR = 0.11.
FIGURE 1 | Con i ma o y ac o analysis esul s o S udy 1.
P edic ing In en ion o Pa icipa e Th ough Mo al
Obliga ion
To es he p edic i e powe o he Mo al Obliga ion Scale on
collec i e ac ion endencies, a s ep-wise linea eg ession analysis
was conduc ed on he in en ion o pa icipa e using mo al
obliga ion, mo al con ic ion, and mo al no m as independen
a iables.
Resul s showed a i s signi ican model whe e mo al
obliga ion was he only p edic o o in en ion o pa icipa e
[F(1,169) = 89.52, p<0.001] whe e R2was 0.34. The nex s ep
included mo al con ic ion [F(2,168) = 48.08, p<0.001] whe e
R2was equal o 0.35. In he case o mo al no m, his a iable did
no en e he s ep-wise analysis (see Table 2).
Two addi ional analyses we e pe o med, wi h con en ional
and non-con en ional pa icipa ion as he dependen
a iables. When he dependen a iable was changed o
con en ional pa icipa ion in en ion, he s ep-wise eg ession
esul ed in a inal h ee a iable model [F(3,167) = 51.69,
p<0.001] comp ising mo al obliga ion, mo al con ic ion,
and mo al no m ( om highe o lowe β), while R2was 0.47
Meanwhile, when he dependen a iable was non-con en ional
pa icipa ion in en ion, only mo al obliga ion accoun ed o i
[F(1,169) = 36.39, p<0.001], wi h he es o dependen a iables
le ou o he analysis; he e, R2was 0.17.
Aside om he p e ious da a, i is in e es ing o analyze
he ela ionship be ween mo al no m, mo al con ic ion, mo al
obliga ion, and collec i e ac ion in en ion. Thus, a media ion
analysis was pe o med in o de o explo e i mo al no m and
mo al con ic ion p ecede o mo al obliga ion. This analysis
was ca ied ou wi h he SPSS PROCESS mac o [ e sion
3.0; o addi ional in o ma ion on he so wa e, see (Hayes
and P eache , 2014)]. A i s model was pe o med o es
i mo al obliga ion media ed he e ec o mo al no m on
in en ion o pa icipa e. The indi ec e ec was es ed h ough
boo s ap es ima ion (1000 samples, 95% le el o con idence).
The e ec o he media ion o mo al obliga ion was signi ican ,
as 65% o he e ec mo al no m had on in en ion o
pa icipa e was due o he media ional ou e o mo al obliga ion
(PM= 0.65, SE = 0.19, 95% CI = 0.38, 1.10), whe eas
he in e se model o mo al no m media ing he e ec o
mo al obliga ion p oduced a non-signi ican indi ec e ec ; in
o he wo ds, he media ion o mo al no m had no impac
in how mo al obliga ion explained in en ion o pa icipa e
(95% CI = 0.00, 0.22).
Ano he media ion es ed he e ec s o mo al obliga ion
as a media o in he ela ionship be ween mo al con ic ion
and in en ion o pa icipa e. The pe cen age explained by he
TABLE 2 | Linea eg ession analysis esul s (S udy 1).
Model BS d. e o β Sig.
1 Mo al obliga ion 0.498 0.053 0.588 9.46 <0.001
2 Mo al obliga ion 0.407 0.067 0.481 6.09 <0.001
Mo al con ic ion 0.148 0.067 0.171 2.16 0.032
Dependen Va iable: Iin en ion o pa icipa e. Mo al no m did no en e in he s ep-
wise linea eg ession analysis.
F on ie s in Psychology | www. on ie sin.o g 5Ma ch 2018 | Volume 9 | A icle 418
psyg-09-00418 Ma ch 27, 2018 Time: 17:23 # 6
Sabucedo e al. Mo al Obliga ion and Collec i e Ac ion
media ional pa h o e he o al e ec was, in his case, a 63%
(PM= 0.63, SE = 0.14, 95% CI = 0.39, 0.98). An al e na i e
model was pe o med whe e mo al con ic ion media ed he
e ec o mo al obliga ion on in en ion o pa icipa e. He e he
media ion o mo al con ic ion was esponsible o 18% o he
o al e ec explained in he model (PM= 0.18, SE = 0.10, 95%
CI = >0.00, 0.42). This indica es ha he ole as a media o o
mo al obliga ion on mo al con ic ion is g ea e han ha o mo al
con ic ion on mo al obliga ion.
Finally, he same p ocedu e was applied o he ela ion
be ween mo al no m and mo al con ic ion. When mo al
con ic ion media ed he e ec o mo al no m, he media ional
ou e accoun ed o 30% o he o al e ec (PM= 0.30, SE = 0.12,
95% CI = 0.12, 0.63) while when mo al no m media ed mo al
con ic ion ha pe cen age was down o 12% (PM= 0.12,
SE = 0.05, 95% CI = 0.04, 0.40).
Discussion
Resul s o S udy 1 suppo he ini ial hypo hesis ha p esen ed
mo al obliga ion, mo al con ic ion, and mo al no m as
di e en ia ed cons uc s. This could mean a g ea deal, no only
in he ield o collec i e ac ion bu also in o he a eas o s udy
wi hin he body o social psychology. The heo y o planned
beha io (Ajzen, 1991) is a good example; he e mo al no m is
usually ope a ionalized as pe cei ed mo al obliga ion, while ou
esul s poin owa d he idea ha hese wo concep s a e di e en
e en hough closely ela ed, which may equi e econside ing
he adequacy o measu ing mo al no m wi h i ems o mo al
obliga ion.
Also, a eliable, sho scale o measu e mo al obliga ion was
ob ained. This scale could easily be used in ield s udies o eal
demons a ions, whe e b ie ness o measu emen ins umen s is
capi al.
The da a o S udy 1 also suppo he idea ha among he
h ee di e en concep s ha accoun o mo al alues, mo al
obliga ion is he one ha wo ks as he bes p edic o . This migh
be because i is concep ually close o he ac ual mani es a ion o
beha io han he o he wo. While he mo al no m is concei ed
as he concep ion o a de e mined beha io as mo ally igh
o w ong, and mo al con ic ion ep esen s wha could be a
pa icula ly cen al mo al no m among he pe son’s belie sys em,
he concep o mo al obliga ion accoun s o he mo i a ion
el by he indi idual o beha e acco dingly o hose mo al
no ms.
The heo e ical a gumen o mo al no m and mo al con ic ion
being p eceden s o mo al obliga ion seems o be suppo ed by
he e idence o he media ional analyses. The ac ha mo al
obliga ion plays a bigge ole as a media o o mo al con ic ion
and mo al no m han ice e sa is wha gi es suppo o his
a gumen . Also, mo al con ic ion being a be e media o o
mo al no m han mo al no m is o mo al con ic ion also gi es
some suppo o he idea o mo al con ic ion being a special
kind o mo al no m. Despi e his, i has o be no ed ha
causal assump ions de i ed om media ional analysis should be
add essed wi h cau ion (Spence e al., 2005).
The ac ha he sample should be mo e he e ogeneous in
e ms o age, as well as mo e balanced in e ms o sex cons i u es
a limi a ion o he p esen s udy, bu none heless, i is conside ed
as adequa e conside ing he objec i es se in i s incep ion.
These esul s also encou age he use o he Mo al Obliga ion
Scale along wi h o he p edic o s o collec i e ac ion, o see how i
a es when in eg a ed among o he , non-mo al na u e p edic i e
a iables o collec i e ac ion.
STUDY 2
In oduc ion
Following he discussion o S udy 1, he main objec i e o
S udy 2 is o es how he mo al obliga ion a iable a es when
p edic ing pa icipa ion in en ion while ac ing oge he wi h
o he p edic i e a iables. The in en ion was also o pe o m his
analysis wi h an ample and mo e he e ogeneous sample, o co e
o he limi a ions o he p e ious s udy.
The a iables ha will ea u e in S udy 2 a e hose de i ed
om he SIMCA: injus ice, e icacy, and iden i y. All o hem
should ha e a p edic i e impac on he in en ion o pa icipa e,
ollowing he indings o an Zome en e al. (2008). Addi ionally,
mo al con ic ion will also ea u e in his s udy, bu no mo al
no m. The eason o his is ha in S udy 1 mo al no m
did no p edic nei he gene al in en ion o pa icipa e no
non-con en ional in en ion o pa icipa e – i is only e y
ma ginally p edic ed con en ional in en ion o pa icipa e –
when in oduced along mo al con ic ion and mo al obliga ion
in he eg ession analyses. Thus, mo al con ic ion is conside ed
he only a iable o he wo ha could possibly wo k be e han
mo al obliga ion as a p edic o o in en ion o pa icipa e in
collec i e ac ion.
Me hod
Pa icipan s and P ocedu e
A p o essional, specialized company was con ac ed o ca y ou
he sampling o his s udy h ough an online su ey di ec ed o
he Spanish gene al popula ion. A sample o 625 pa icipan s was
de e mined. Tha numbe was ixed o an in ini e popula ion,
wi h a con idence coe icien o 95% and a sampling e o o
4%. The inal sample, a e con olling and il e ing o missing
alues, was o six hund ed and wen y- wo (622) pa icipan s
om Spain’s gene al popula ion, o whom 396 we e women
(accoun ing o 63.7% o he sample). Age o he pa icipan s
anged om 19 o 75, wi h a mean alue o 43.79, which is
ex emely close o Spain’s ac ual mean age o 43.69 (Ins i u o
Nacional de Es adís ica, 2017). Pa icipan s esponded o an
online ques ionnai e de eloped in Qual ics so wa e.
To ame he hypo he ical p o es , a ex abou he si ua ion o
Spain’s public heal h sys em appea ed be o e he ques ionnai e.
I was a small compendium o some o he cu s made by he
go e nmen o e ecen yea s.
Measu es
Mo al obliga ion
Mo al obliga ion was measu ed using he p e iously alida ed
scale in S udy 1. This i e-i em Like scale ( anging om 1 o ally
F on ie s in Psychology | www. on ie sin.o g 6Ma ch 2018 | Volume 9 | A icle 418
psyg-09-00418 Ma ch 27, 2018 Time: 17:23 # 7
Sabucedo e al. Mo al Obliga ion and Collec i e Ac ion
disag ee o 5 o ally ag ee) showed highe le els o eliabili y han
in he p e ious s udy (C onbach’s alpha = 0.92).
Iden i y
Social iden i y was measu ed by apping in he dimensions o
cogni i e cen ali y and a ec i e ela ionship wi h he e e ence
g oup ( an Zome en e al., 2008). Being a g oup iden i ica ion
measu e, a e e ence g oup is needed; in his case, he whi e ide
was he e e ence g oup. Whi e ide is a g oup o o ganiza ions
ha de end public heal h and denounce cu s in Spain.
The measu e comp ised i e Like scaled i ems (C onbach’s
alpha = 0.89) ha measu ed eelings o sympa hy, iden i ica ion,
connec ion, and ag eemen owa d he whi e ide (e.g., “I sha e
alues and belie s wi h he whi e ide mo emen ”).
Injus ice
Feelings o injus ice we e measu ed by asking pa icipan s o
e alua e he aus e i y poli ics pe o med in he con ex o public
heal h on h ee dicho omous scales: unjus –jus , bad–good, and
nega i e–posi i e (C onbach’s alpha = 0.97). All h ee scales
anged om 1 o 10.
E icacy
Fou i ems adap ed om Ho nsey e al. (2006) we e used
(C onbach’s alpha = 0.79). Pa icipan s we e asked o de e mine
he le el o e icacy hey pe cei ed abou p o es ing in de ense o
public heal h in a scale ha anged om e y li le e ec i e o
e y e ec i e (e.g., how e ec i e a p o es will be in “in luencing
Pa liamen poli icians”).
A ec i e injus ice
A ec i e injus ice was measu ed by asking people how hey
el abou he managemen o he public heal h sys em by he
go e nmen du ing he c isis [e.g., ang y, annoyed, and sa is ied
( e e se-sco ed); C onbach’s alpha = 0.75].
Mo al con ic ion
The mo al con ic ion measu e o his s udy was aken om
Ski ka e al. (2009) and i comp ised wo i ems e alua ing how
nuclea he public heal h subjec was wi hin pa icipan ’s mo al
sys em (Ski ka and Mo gan, 2014; e.g., how much a e you
eelings abou his issue connec ed o you co e mo al belie s and
con ic ions?) (C onbach’s alpha = 0.82).
In en ion o pa icipa e
To measu e in en ion o pa icipa e, a sho e e sion o he
ins umen used in S udy 1 was selec ed. This ime, pa icipan s
showed hei ag eemen o disag eemen on pe o ming i e
di e en p o es ac s ( h ee o hem con en ional and wo
uncon en ional). The scale once again was shown o be eliable
(C onbach’s alpha = 0.84).
Resul s
Fi s and o emos , a new CFA o he Mo al Obliga ion Scale was
pe o med; his was done in o de o eplica e he analysis o he
Mo al Obliga ion Scale in S udy 1, as a good esul will suppo
he obus ness o he scale. The model i o he Mo al Obliga ion
Scale was again good: GFI = 0.98; CFI = 0.99; RMSEA = 0.08; and
SRMR = 0.01 (see Supplemen a y Da a Shee S2 o he o iginal
da a ma ix).
A s ep-wise linea eg ession analysis was conside ed o
be he bes echnique o analyze he da a. All a iables we e
in oduced in he analysis, along wi h sex and age, in o de o
con ol o i s in luence. The inal model [F(6,615) = 153.27,
p<0.001] showed an R2 alue o 0.59, and esul ed in six s eps,
he a iables ha signi ican ly p edic ed in en ion o pa icipa e
being (in o de om highe o lowe β alues, c i e ia ha
will hold o he es o he p esen wo k): iden i y, mo al
obliga ion, a ec i e injus ice, injus ice, e icacy, and age (see
Table 3). Mo al con ic ion was he only a iable excluded in he
analysis.
Addi ionally, as he in en ion o pa icipa e measu e
comp ised bo h con en ional and non-con en ional o ms
o collec i e ac ion, a s ep-wise linea eg ession analysis was
pe o med o bo h ypes o pa icipa ion using he same
independen a iables.
Fo con en ional pa icipa ion, he model esul ed in i e
s eps [F(5,616) = 234.35, p<0.001] wi h an associa ed R2equal
o 0.65. The a iables ha explained in en ion in con en ional
pa icipa ion we e: iden i y, mo al obliga ion, a ec i e injus ice,
injus ice, and age (see Table 4).
Finally, when non-con en ional p o es was he dependen
a iable, he esul ing model was con igu ed by ou s eps
TABLE 3 | Coe icien s o he se o a iables used in S udy 2 in he p edic ion o
gene al in en ion o pa icipa e (s ep-wise linea eg ession).
BS d. e o β p
Iden i y 0.349 0.040 0.342 8.65 <0.001
Mo al obliga ion 0.273 0.033 0.312 8.23 <0.001
A ec i e injus ice 0.148 0.034 0.134 4.31 <0.001
Injus ice 0.083 0.024 0.102 3.48 0.001
E icacy 0.122 0.047 0.080 2.59 0.010
Age −0.008 0.003 −0.074 −2.80 0.005
F153.27∗ ∗ ∗
R20.59
Dependen a iable: in en ion o pa icipa e (gene al). This able ep esen s he
coe icien s o he las s ep o he analysis. ∗ ∗ ∗ p<0.001.
TABLE 4 | Coe icien s o he a iables ha en e ed he s ep-wise analysis
p edic ing o con en ional in en ion o pa icipa e.
BS d. e o β p
Iden i y 0.361 0.034 0.377 10.65 <0.001
Mo al obliga ion 0.257 0.028 0.313 9.08 <0.001
Injus ice 0.107 0.021 0.140 5.15 <0.001
A ec i e injus ice 0.175 0.030 0.169 5.90 <0.001
Age −0.006 0.002 −0.060 −2.47 0.014
F234.35∗ ∗ ∗
R20.65
Dependen a iable: in en ion o pa icipa e (con en ional). This able ep esen s
he coe icien s o he las s ep o he analysis. ∗ ∗ ∗ p<0.001.
F on ie s in Psychology | www. on ie sin.o g 7Ma ch 2018 | Volume 9 | A icle 418
psyg-09-00418 Ma ch 27, 2018 Time: 17:23 # 8
Sabucedo e al. Mo al Obliga ion and Collec i e Ac ion
TABLE 5 | Coe icien s o he a iables ha en e ed he s ep-wise analysis
p edic ing o non-con en ional in en ion o pa icipa e.
BS d. e o β p
Iden i y 0.370 0.070 0.262 5.29 <0.001
A ec i e injus ice 0.127 0.060 0.083 2.13 0.034
Mo al obliga ion 0.316 0.059 0.261 5.37 <0.001
E icacy 0.200 0.084 0.095 2.38 0.017
Age −0.010 0.005 −0.069 −2.05 0.40
F62.19∗ ∗ ∗
R20.33
Dependen a iable: in en ion o pa icipa e (non-con en ional). ∗ ∗ ∗ p<0.001.
[F(5,616) = 62.19, p<0.001] ha gene a ed an R2o 0.33. The
independen a iables ha esul ed signi ican ly p edic i e we e
as ollows: iden i y, mo al obliga ion, e icacy, a ec i e injus ice,
and age (see Table 5).
A eplica ion o he media ional analysis o S udy 1 was
pe o med in o de o es i he esul s held while using a mo e
ep esen a i e sample. In he case o mo al con ic ion media ed
by mo al obliga ion, he a io o he indi ec o o al e ec was
60% (PM= 0.60, SE = 0.07, 95% CI = 0.46, 0.75).
Al e na i ely, when mo al con ic ion media ed he e ec o
mo al obliga ion on in en ion o pa icipa e, he e ec o he
media ion ou e explained only 10% o he o al e ec (PM= 0.10,
SE = 0.02, 95% CI = 0.06, 0.16). As can be obse ed, esul s
eplica ed hose o S udy 1.
Discussion
The p ima y aim o his s udy was o es he pe o mance
o he mo al obliga ion a iable as a p edic o o in en ion o
pa icipa e when i was used among o he adi ional p edic i e
a iables o collec i e ac ion. Fi s , i mus be no ed ha he
measu e de eloped in S udy 1 o mo al obliga ion p o es o be
highly eliable again, his ime wi h a mo e gene al sample, wi h
C onbach’s alpha coe icien no ably inc easing in his second
s udy as well as he CFA indices once mo e showing a good i .
The esul s also suppo he idea o mo al obliga ion being
a obus p edic o o he in en ion o pa icipa e in collec i e
ac ion (bo h con en ional and non-con en ional), as i showed
he second g ea es size e ec in he i s wo analyses, opped
only by he iden i y a iable and he g ea es e ec size o
non-con en ional pa icipa ion.
Con e sely, mo al con ic ion did no ea u e in any o he
h ee models as a signi ican p edic o o in en ion o pa icipa e
in collec i e ac ion o any kind. This shows he supe io i y
o mo al obliga ion o e mo al con ic ion as a p edic o o
collec i e ac ion.
Al hough he p incipal aim o he cu en s udy was no o
gene a e a model o in en ion o pa icipa ion, he model ha
esul ed om he analysis came as a ema kably s ong one. I
accoun ed o 59% o he a iance o he gene al in en ion o
pa icipa e and o 64% o he a iance o in en ion o pa icipa e
in con en ional p o es .
As o he es o a iables, in gene al e ms, he p esen
da a suppo p e ious indings. This can be obse ed in ha
all a iables ela ed wi h SIMCA had p edic i e in luence
in he gene al in en ion o pa icipa e. Howe e , e icacy
did no signi ican ly p edic in en ion o pa icipa e in
con en ional collec i e ac ion bu did p edic in en ion o
non-con en ional pa icipa ion. The eason o his esul could
be ha con en ional pa icipa ion implies ewe po en ial cos s,
and hus he pe cep ion o e icacy is no so impo an . On
he o he hand, non-con en ional pa icipa ion implies g ea e
po en ial cos s, and hus pa icipan s will elabo a e mo e in
a cos s–bene i s logic, which will inc ease he impo ance o
pe cei ed e icacy.
Also, only a ec i e injus ice bu no he cogni i e componen
o injus ice appea ed as a p edic o o non-con en ional in en ion
o pa icipa e. This is an unsu p ising esul as an Zome en
e al. (2008) al eady showed ha a ec i e injus ice was a
be e p edic o han cogni i e injus ice. Addi ionally, a ecen
s udy in collec i e ac ion in high isk con ex s showed ha
isk pe cep ion p edic s ange (Ayanian and Tausch, 2016).
Al hough non-con en ional ac ions a e no necessa ily isky in
Wes e n democ acies, isk pe cep ions may be inc eased, making
ange mo e salien , which could explain ha a ec i e injus ice
o e shadows i s cogni i e componen in he p edic ion o non-
con en ional collec i e ac ion in en ion. Finally, age also had
a p edic i e impac , hough i showed he lowes associa ed
e ec size o all a iables, his e ec was also nega i e, which is
cong uen wi h p e ious indings in he li e a u e (Gallego, 2007).
The p esen sample has good size and age ep esen a ion, bu
i is impo an o poin ou ha i is o e ep esen ed in e ms o
women o e men, and his cons i u es a sligh limi a ion. Ano he
limi a ion is he use o in en ion as he dependen a iable. The e
is a well-documen ed in en ion–beha io gap, as in en ions do
no always au oma ically esul in e ec i e beha io (Ajzen e al.,
2009). This cons i u es ano he and mo e impo an limi a ion o
he p esen s udy, making i necessa y o es he pe o mance
o mo al obliga ion as a p edic o a iable o eal collec i e
ac ion pa icipa ion, in o de o clea ly es ablish i s po en ial
explana o y powe .
STUDY 3
In oduc ion
The main goal o he hi d and las s udy is o es he p edic i e
powe o mo al obliga ion among o he a iables in he con ex
o a demons a ion, compa ing people in and ou side he p o es
as well as add essing he limi a ions o he p e ious s udy.
Me hod
Pa icipan s and P ocedu e
Fo his s udy, da a we e collec ed in si u du ing he 2017
May Day demons a ions. Thi y- wo (32) enqui e s wo ked in
he da a compila ion p ocess. Di ided in o eigh eams o ou
di ec ed by a poin e . Sampling was ca ied ou ollowing he
ins uc ions by Van Aels and Walg a e (2001) o he ga he ing
o da a in a demons a ion con ex . The aim o his p ocedu e
is o gua an ee ha e e yone in he demons a ion has an equal
oppo uni y o be selec ed as a pa icipan , elimina ing he
F on ie s in Psychology | www. on ie sin.o g 8Ma ch 2018 | Volume 9 | A icle 418
psyg-09-00418 Ma ch 27, 2018 Time: 17:23 # 9
Sabucedo e al. Mo al Obliga ion and Collec i e Ac ion
possible bias o enqui e s app oaching people ha may seem
mo e ecep i e o hem. The p ocedu e consis s in o ming
eams o in e iewe s, di ec ed by a poin e . Fou eams co e ed
he demons a ion, s a ing simul aneously a he op and he
back o he demons a ion, and wo ked hei way owa d he
middle, skipping a p e iously ixed numbe o ows as hey
p og essed in hei espec i e di ec ions. The poin e decided
a all imes which demons a o was o be app oached, making
he p ocess ully andom o he in e iewe and allowing o
quo a con ol. A he same ime, ano he ou eams co e ed he
icini y o he demons a ion in o de o ge esponses o non-
demons a o s. This way, he p ocedu e allows o selec people
ha ha e he possibili y o demons a e bu chose o no do
i , gua an eeing ha hey a e willingly no demons a ing. Also,
he p ocedu e allows o con ol o ce ain quo as o inc ease
he chances o ge ing a highly ep esen a i e sample. The aim
o he sampling p ocess wi h an expec ed pa icipa ion o 9
demons a o s was o ob ain a sample o 200 demons a o s,
which will be ep esen a i e o a con idence coe icien o 95%
and a sampling e o o 7%.
Da a we e collec ed using “d oidSURVEY” so wa e, as
enqui e s comple ed he ques ionnai e on sma phones,
ollowing he commands o pa icipan s.
A sample o ou hund ed and se en (407) pa icipan s
was ga he ed, wo hund ed and six een (216) we e non-
demons a o s, and one hund ed and nine y-one (191) we e
demons a o s. O he whole sample, wo hund ed and wo
pa icipan s (202) we e women (49.6%). Mean age o he sample
was 42.94.
Measu es
Mos a iables in S udy 3 we e he same as in S udy 2, and
he ins umen s used o measu e hem we e e y simila o
hose o he p e ious s udy. Mo al obliga ion was measu ed
using he same scale de eloped in s udy 1 and used in s udy 2.
Reliabili y emained s ong (C onbach’s alpha = 0.84). Iden i y
was measu ed wi h he same scale as in S udy 2, only his ime
he measu e e e ed o he o ganize s o he demons a ions
ins ead o e e ing o he whi e ide as he e e ence g oup.
Also, i had ou i ems ins ead o i e (C onbach’s alpha = 0.92).
The injus ice measu e was he same as in S udy 2, bu in
his s udy, all h ee scales anged om 0 o 10 (C onbach’s
alpha = 0.91). The measu e o e icacy o his s udy was iden ical
o ha o S udy 2, whe e he only di e ence was an ex a i em
apping immedia e ins umen al e icacy o he demons a ion
(C onbach’s alpha = 0.83). The a ec i e injus ice measu e used he
same h ee i ems as in S udy 2: ange , annoyance, and sa is ac ion
( e e sed; C onbach’s alpha = 0.77).
Resul s
As he e we e some missing alues, a mul iple impu a ion
was applied o he da a o main ain he o iginal sample size.
This me hod was ca ied ou ollowing he ecommenda ions
o (Bodne , 2008) (see Supplemen a y Da a Shee S3 o he
o iginal da a ma ix). A bina y logis ic eg ession was conduc ed
wi h he ca ego ical a iable o pa icipan /non-pa icipan in he
demons a ion as he dependen a iable, he es o measu ed
a iables we e in oduced as independen a iables, and age and
sex we e also in oduced as co a iables o con ol i s in luence.
The me hod chosen o his analysis was he o wa d Wald
me hod.
Resul s o he logis ic eg ession we e good in e ms o
signi icance o he model [χ2(5) = 194.05, p<0.001), explained
a iance (Nagelke ke’s R2= 0.50) and classi ica ion a e (78.9%
o o e all co ec classi ica ion, 77.8% o non-pa icipan s, and
80.1% o pa icipan s).
The a iables ha signi ican ly p edic ed whe he people we e
pa icipan s o no pa icipan s we e as ollows: mo al obliga ion,
iden i y, injus ice, e icacy, and age. Rega ding mo al obliga ion,
his alue was no only he a iable wi h he highes odds a io
[Exp(B) = 2.538], bu also almos double he nex highe odds
a io, which was ha o iden i y [Exp(B) = 1.430; see Table 6].
Discussion
This ime, ac ual pa icipa ion was measu ed along a p ope ly
compa able g oup o pa icipan s and non-pa icipan s in a
public demons a ion, in an e o o ackle he limi a ions o
S udy 2, es ing mo al obliga ion in a eal en i onmen . The i s
conclusion we can d aw om S udy 3 is ha mo al obliga ion
seems o be a key p edic o o pa icipa ion in demons a ions, as
i appea s as he p edic i e a iable wi h he g ea es e ec size.
This leads us o conside why iden i y was he mos powe ul
p edic o on in en ion o pa icipa e (S udy 2) and why mo al
obliga ion becomes he mos p edic i e independen a iable in
he model when ac ual pa icipa ion is he dependen a iable
(S udy 3). A possible explana ion o his phenomenon could be
ha mo al obliga ion is mo e in ense when immedia e beha io
is measu ed, a he han when he assessmen is pe o med
using in en ion. Acco ding o ou de ini ion, mo al obliga ion
cons i u es a mo i a ion o beha e acco ding o one’s mo al alues
in o de o main ain a posi i e sel -concep . Thus, he mo e
conc e e he oppo uni y o pa icipa e becomes, he mo e he
mo al obliga ion will be ac i a ed.
As o he SIMCA a iables, he only one ha did no
yield signi ican impac wi h pa icipa ion beha io was a ec i e
injus ice. Despi e a ec i e injus ice playing a e y cen al ole in
mobilizing people ( an Zome en e al., 2008), his may depend
TABLE 6 | Va iables in he inal model o o wa d Wald bina y logis ic eg ession
p edic ing pa icipa ion s. non-pa icipa ion in he May Day demons a ion held in
Mad id, 2017.
Va iable BS d. e o Exp(B)p
Mo al obliga ion 0.931 0.151 2.538 <0.001
Iden i y 0.358 0.095 1.430 <0.001
Injus ice 0.268 0.076 1.308 <0.001
E icacy 0.342 0.146 1.408 0.019
Age −0.017 0.008 0.983 0.039
χ2194.05∗ ∗ ∗
R20.50
The able ep esen s he pooled da a om he mul iple impu a ion pe o med o
ea missing da a. Exp(B): odds a io; ∗ ∗ ∗ p<0.001.
F on ie s in Psychology | www. on ie sin.o g 9Ma ch 2018 | Volume 9 | A icle 418
