Moral absolutism, self-deception, and moral self-concept in men who commit intimate partner violence: a comparative study with an opposite sample

Abstract

The main objective of this study is to evaluate, for the first time in a sample of men who commit intimate partner violence, their levels of moral absolutism, self-deception, moral self-concept, and psychological well-being in an attempt to demonstrate that, more than affected by any pathology, they are inhibited about the moral consequences of their behaviors. We hypothesize that they feel a strong certainty about the rightness of their moral values and they strongly deceive themselves in order to maintain a good self-concept, and thus a good level of well-being. To do that, we compare their scores to those obtained by an opposite sample regarding the use of violence, made up of professional male psychologists who currently work in the social field trying to teach others alternative strategies to violence. Results from variance analyses show that, as hypothesized, men who use violence against their partners score higher in moral absolutism and self-deception. They also are more unfair playing the Ultimatum Game. But at the same time, they feel as moral and as good as the opposite sample. Mediation analyses show that moral absolutism is related to moral self-concept through self-deception in the sample of men who use violence against their intimate partners, but not in the opposite sample.