In Study 3. we demonstrated that the moral judgments of anxiously attached individuals are influenced by what they believe the group desires. When the group desired the utilitarian option, those who were high in attachment anxiety were more likely to endorse the utilitarian course of action. However, when the group desired the deontological option, attachment anxiety played no role in predicting moral judgments. In other words, we removed the effect of attachment anxiety on moral judgments by providing feedback that the group desired a de- ontological outcome. This pattern suggests that a principal reason why anxiously (and not avoidantly) attached people choose the utilitarian option is that they see that option as a vehicle to social approval. When the utilitarian option does not promise to yield such approval they are less likely to endorse that option. In contrast, whereas in general avoidant people choose the
utilitarian option, in Study 3, when the group desired the utilitarian option, high (but not low) avoidant participants made a point of condemning that option. This reactance-like tendency to actively resist influence from others has been demonstrated in previous work on avoidantly attached individuals (e.g. overall & Sibley. 2009: overall et al. 2013)