Gender-Role Egalitarianism and Dating Violence Rejection in Turkish University Students: Distinct Fairness Facets of Proportionality and Equality
Abstract
Dating violence remains a significant concern in emerging adulthood, yet rejection of dating violence may not be fully explained by gender-role egalitarian beliefs alone. Moral foundations were also considered as potential explanatory factors in understanding attitudes toward dating violence. Drawing on Moral Foundations Theory and the distinction between equality-based and proportionality-based fairness, this cross-sectional study examined whether proportionality-based fairness judgments are involved in an indirect association linking gender-role egalitarianism to dating-violence rejection among Turkish university students. Participants were 356 Turkish university students (18–28 years) who completed self-report measures assessing the study variables. Regression-based indirect-effect models with bootstrap confidence intervals were used to examine the proposed associations between these variables. The results indicated that more egalitarian gender beliefs were strongly associated with rejecting dating violence, and proportionality-based fairness showed a modest but statistically significant indirect association. In concurrent models, the two fairness facets showed distinct patterns, supporting the value of conceptualizing fairness as multidimensional. Because the design is cross-sectional and based on self-report measures, the findings do not establish temporal ordering or causal mechanisms. The results point to the need for future vignette-based and longitudinal studies in university populations to further examine these relationships and clarify their development over time.
Keywords
dating violence, dating violence rejection, gender-role egalitarianism, Moral Foundations Theory, proportionality, equality
Supporting Institution
Kocaeli University Social and Human Sciences Ethics Committee
Ethical Statement
Ethical approval for this study was obtained from the Kocaeli University Social and Human Sciences Ethics Committee (approval date: 24 February 2025; reference no.: E-94094268-204.01.07-738106).
References
- Altınova, H. H., & Duyan, V. (2013). Toplumsal cinsiyet algısı ölçeğinin geçerlilik güvenilirlik çalışması [The validity and reliability of Perception of Gender Scale]. Toplum ve Sosyal Hizmet [Society and Social Work], 24(2), 9–22. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/tsh/issue/48480/614123
- Atari, M., Haidt, J., Graham, J., Koleva, S., Stevens, S. T., & Dehghani, M. (2023). Morality beyond the WEIRD: How the nomological network of morality varies across cultures. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 125(5), 1157–1188. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000470
- Avşar Baldan, G., & Akış, N. (2017). Flört şiddeti [Dating violence]. Uludağ Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi Dergisi [Journal of Uludağ University Medical Faculty], 43(1), 41–44. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/uutfd/issue/35308/391935
- Bandura, A., Barbaranelli, C., Caprara, G. V., & Pastorelli, C. (1996). Mechanisms of moral disengagement in the exercise of moral agency. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71(2), 364–374. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.71.2.364
- Bandura, A. (1999). Moral disengagement in the perpetration of inhumanities. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 3(3), 193–209. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327957pspr0303_3
- Doğruyol, B., Velioğlu, İ., Bayrak, F., Acem, E., İşler, O., & Yılmaz, O. (2024). Validation of the Moral Foundations Questionnaire-2 in the Turkish context: Exploring its relationship with moral behavior. Current Psychology, 43, 24438–24452. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-024-06097-z
- Eagly, A. H., & Wood, W. (2012). Social role theory. In P. A. M. Van Lange, A. W. Kruglanski, & E. T. Higgins (Eds.), Handbook of theories of social psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 458–476). London, England: SAGE Publications. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446249222.n49
- Graham, J., Haidt, J., & Nosek, B. A. (2009). Liberals and conservatives rely on different sets of moral foundations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96(5), 1029–1046. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0015141
- Graham, J., Haidt, J., Nosek, B. A., Iyer, R., Koleva, S., & Ditto, P. H. (2011). Mapping the moral domain. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 101(2), 366–385. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0021847
- Graham, J., Haidt, J., Koleva, S., Motyl, M., Iyer, R., Wojcik, S. P., & Ditto, P. H. (2013). Moral foundations theory: The pragmatic validity of moral pluralism. In P. G. Devine & A. P. Plant (Eds.), Advances in Experimental Social Psychology (Vol. 47, pp. 55–130). San Diego, CA: Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-407236-7.00002-4
