Applying moral foundations theory to the 2019 Australian federal election

Abstract

Moral foundations theory argues that human moral judgement is based on at least five ethical concerns: care, fairness, loyalty, authority, and sanctity. Surveys find that left-wing individuals primarily endorse the care and fairness foundations when making moral judgements, while right-wing individuals ground their sense of morality in loyalty, authority, and sanctity. Moral reframing is a persuasive technique that takes these differences into account. It involves taking a left-wing (right-wing) political position and framing it in right-wing (left-wing) moral foundations. Research finds that moral reframing can increase electoral support for political candidates by making a politician’s political positions more appealing to voters who would typically lean towards the candidate’s opposition. Although much evidence points to moral reframing’s utility, little is known if politicians implement it in practice. Therefore, this paper investigates the question ‘what moral foundations do politicians appeal to during election campaigns?’ and focuses specifically on the case of the 2019 Australian federal election. Through qualitative content analysis of the campaign launch speeches of the Australian Labor Party (ALP; Australia’s primary leftwing party) and the Liberal Party of Australia (the Liberal Party; Australia’s primary right-wing party), I find that the ALP relies heavily on appeals to the care and fairness foundation while largely ignoring loyalty, authority, and sanctity. Meanwhile, the Liberal Party mentions loyalty, authority, and sanctity significantly more than the ALP but also relies heavily on care and fairness appeals. This suggests that, in practice, the ALP does not tend to use moral reframing, while the Liberal Party does.