Moral Foundation Theory provides a framework of understanding the underlying foundations of moral reasoning. More specifically, it is made up of five foundations that are 'intuitive ethics' representing values and norms that vary from person to person and influenced by developmental experiences. The purpose of this study was to investigate whether a relationship existed between athletic identity and the moral value preferences of collegiate athletes to shed light on the social impacts of athletic participation on college students. Two hundred and thirty-eight NCAA Division I intercollegiate, club sport, and intramural sport student-athletes completed measures of athletic identity and moral reasoning. Athletic identity was measured using the Athletic Identity Measurement Scale (AIMS) and the Moral Foundations Questionnaire (MFQ) served to evaluate participants' moral foundations. Although the primary hypothesis of a negative relationship between athletic identity and harm/care and fairness/reciprocity was not supported, analyses indicated that athletic identity was positively and significantly associated with ingroup/loyalty, authority/respect, and purity/sanctity values. Additional analyses indicated that gender and years of collegiate sporting experience moderated some of these relationships.

A central question in social psychology is to what extent individual differences in attitudes, prejudices, and stereotypes can predict discriminatory behavior. This is often studied by simply regressing a measure of behavior toward a single group (e.g., behavior toward Black people only) onto the predictors (e.g., attitude measures). In the present paper, we remind researchers that an analysis focusing on predicting the differential treatment (e.g., behavior towards Black people vs. White people) has a higher conceptual validity and will result in more informative effect sizes. The paper is concluded with a list of suggestions for future research on the link between attitudes, prejudices, stereotypes and discrimination.

The criterion validity of a general factor of personality (GFP) extracted from personality scales of various lengths was explored in relation to organizational behavior and subjective well-being with 288 employed students. Results indicated that GFPs extracted from as few as 10 items were significantly related to organizational outcomes. The relationship between GFP scores and outcomes generally increased with the length of the underlying scales, but these differences were reduced when correcting for reliability. Additionally, in over 60% of the analyses the GFPs exhibited higher correlations with specific outcomes compared to specific Big Five scores; this was true of 100% of the analyses using a broad, composite criterion. These results highlight the potential utility of the GFP as a screening tool when extracted from Big Five inventories from 10 to 100 items.