The effect of gender and parenting daughters on judgments of morally controversial companies

Earlier findings suggest that men with daughters make judgments and decisions somewhat in line with those made by women. In this paper, we attempt to extend those findings, by testing how gender and parenting daughters affect judgments of the appropriateness of investing in and working for morally controversial companies (“sin stocks”). To do so, in Study 1 (N = 634) we investigate whether women judge the prospect of investing in sin stocks more harshly than men do, and test the hypothesis that men with daughters judge such investments less favorably than other men. In Study 2 (N = 782), we investigate the willingness to work in morally controversial companies at a significant wage premium. Results show that—for men—parenting daughters yields harsher evaluations of sin stocks, but no evidence that it lowers the propensity to work in such companies. This contrasts to the effect of gender: women reliably judge both investment and employment in morally controversial companies more harshly than men do. We suggest that an aversion towards morally controversial companies might be a partial determinant of the gender gap in wages.

The effect of gender and parenting daughters on judgments of morally controversial companies

Earlier findings suggest that men with daughters make judgments and decisions somewhat in line with those made by women. In this paper, we attempt to extend those findings, by testing how gender and parenting daughters affect judgments of the appropriateness of investing in and working for morally controversial companies (“sin stocks”). To do so, in Study 1 (N = 634) we investigate whether women judge the prospect of investing in sin stocks more harshly than men do, and test the hypothesis that men with daughters judge such investments less favorably than other men. In Study 2 (N = 782), we investigate the willingness to work in morally controversial companies at a significant wage premium. Results show that – for men – parenting daughters yields harsher evaluations of sin stocks, but no evidence that it lowers the propensity to work in such companies. This contrasts to the effect of gender: women reliably judge both investment and employment in morally controversial companies more harshly than men do. We suggest that an aversion towards morally controversial companies might be a partial determinant of the gender gap in wages.

Deontological and Utilitarian Responses to Sacrificial Dilemmas Predict Disapproval of Sin Stocks

Investors sometimes invest in so-called ‘sin’ stocks that cause social harm as a byproduct of doing business (e.g., tobacco companies). Two studies examined whether people who demonstrate moral concerns in sacrificial dilemmas approve less of investing in sin (but not conventional) stocks. We employed process dissociation to assess harm-rejection (deontological) and outcome-maximization (utilitarian) response tendencies independently. Study 1 (N=337) assessed moral approval of sin stocks (e.g., fur and gambling industries) and conventional stocks (e.g., water utilities and semiconductor producers). People scoring higher on deontological and utilitarian response tendencies disapproved of sin, but not conventional, stocks. Study 2 (N=402) replicated this effect for willingness to invest in companies abandoning (vs. retaining) socially responsible policies to maximize profits. These findings align with studies showing that people who care about morality demonstrate sensitivity to both deontological and utilitarian considerations, and clarify the psychology involved in morally questionable investment decisions.