Virtue signalling refers to the act of expressing moral values publicly, often through social media or other platforms, to demonstrate one’s values or social consciousness. While the term is sometimes used pejoratively to suggest superficial or performative morality, it encompasses a complex interplay of social psychology, identity, and cultural influences. This article examines the concept of virtue signalling, exploring its origins, motivations, criticisms, and psychological basis.

Keywords: Virtue signalling, Social identity and impression management, Consumer ethics, Corporate virtue signalling, Moral grandstanding

Virtue signalling, as a term, emerged in recent years and is commonly associated with public displays of moral behaviour or opinions. Whether it involves endorsing causes on social media, participating in social justice campaigns, or showing support for movements, virtue signalling reflects the way individuals communicate their values to a wider audience (MacFarlane 2017).

Virtue signalling can be understood through several psychological theories and social motivations:

1. Social Identity Theory
Social identity theory suggests that individuals define themselves through their group affiliations. By publicly aligning with certain values, people reinforce their membership in particular social or ideological groups, bolstering their social identity and sense of belonging (Tajfel & Turner 1986).

2. Impression Management
In the context of social psychology, impression management refers to the ways in which individuals control how they are perceived by others. Virtue signalling is often an act of impression management, where individuals present themselves in a morally favourable light to gain social approval or avoid criticism (Leary & Kowalski 1990).

3. Evolutionary Psychology
Some evolutionary psychologists argue that virtue signalling serves as a strategy to enhance one’s reputation within a group, increasing social standing. By showcasing moral behaviour, individuals may gain trust, status, and opportunities for reciprocal support within their community (Kurzban 2012).

Virtue signalling manifests in various ways, especially in an era dominated by digital communication. Common forms include:

1. Social Media Activism
Social media platforms are one of the most prevalent arenas for virtue signalling. Individuals frequently share content or hashtags related to social issues, expressing solidarity with movements like climate action, racial equality, or mental health awareness (Kristofferson et al. 2014).

2. Consumer Choices
Consumer choices also serve as a form of virtue signalling. From purchasing eco-friendly products to supporting brands that align with specific ethical values, individuals often make consumer decisions that align with their moral identity (Bennett & Chakravarti 2009).

3. Corporate Virtue Signalling
Corporations and brands engage in virtue signalling through marketing campaigns that promote socially conscious messages. Critics argue that this approach, sometimes referred to as “woke washing,” may reflect performative ethics aimed at profit rather than genuine social impact (Shepherd et al. 2019).

While virtue signalling can reflect genuine values, it has also drawn criticism, particularly when it appears performative. Common critiques include:

1. Superficiality and Lack of Action
Critics argue that virtue signalling often lacks depth, serving as a means for individuals to appear morally righteous without engaging in meaningful action. For instance, sharing a post about climate change on social media may create awareness but does little to address the underlying issue (MacFarlane 2017).

2. Polarisation and Social Division
Publicly declaring one’s values can also lead to social division and polarisation, as individuals align themselves with particular ideologies or identities. This may result in “us vs. them” mentalities, where individuals signal moral superiority over others, potentially leading to conflict and alienation (Mason 2018).

3. Inauthenticity and “Woke Washing”
Virtue signalling is often criticised as inauthentic, especially when corporations or public figures adopt social justice stances for reputational gain. When actions do not align with professed values, audiences may view these displays as hypocritical or exploitative (Shepherd et al. 2019).

While virtue signalling faces criticism, it can also play a role in promoting social change by raising awareness and normalising certain values. Social media activism, for example, has contributed to the spread of social movements, as individuals’ posts reach wide audiences and create discussions about important issues (Kristofferson et al. 2014).

1. Normalising Positive Values
Public displays of support for causes like environmentalism or equality can help normalise these values, encouraging others to adopt similar stances. Virtue signalling may serve as an initial step that fosters broader societal change through incremental shifts in behaviour.

2. Creating Accountability
By publicly stating their values, individuals and corporations may become more accountable for their actions, leading to greater alignment between moral beliefs and behaviours. This accountability can encourage meaningful change over time (Bennett & Chakravarti 2009).

Virtue signalling, while sometimes criticised as performative or superficial, reflects a complex blend of social psychology, identity, and cultural norms. Whether used for impression management, social cohesion, or genuine activism, virtue signalling underscores the power of social behaviour in shaping modern discourse. Recognising the motivations and potential impacts of virtue signalling can help individuals navigate public expressions of morality more thoughtfully and authentically.

• Bennett, A, & Chakravarti, D 2009, ‘Consumer awareness and ethical consumption’, Journal of Consumer Research, vol. 36, no. 4, pp. 606-621.
• Kristofferson, K, White, K, & Peloza, J 2014, ‘The nature of slacktivism: How the social observability of an initial act of token support affects subsequent prosocial action’, Journal of Consumer Research, vol. 40, no. 6, pp. 1149-1166.
• Kurzban, R 2012, Why everyone (else) is a hypocrite: Evolution and the modular mind, Princeton University Press, Princeton.
• Leary, MR & Kowalski, RM 1990, ‘Impression management: A literature review and two-component model’, Psychological Bulletin, vol. 107, no. 1, pp. 34-47.
• MacFarlane, B 2017, ‘Virtue signalling and moral grandstanding’, Journal of Public Ethics, vol. 16, no. 2, pp. 134-148.
• Mason, L 2018, Uncivil Agreement: How Politics Became Our Identity, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
• Shepherd, S, Meehan, J, & Sutherland, J 2019, ‘Woke washing: The ethical cost of corporate virtue signalling’, Journal of Business Ethics, vol. 158, no. 3, pp. 805-818.
• Tajfel, H & Turner, JC 1986, ‘The social identity theory of intergroup behaviour’, in S Worchel & WG Austin (eds.), Psychology of Intergroup Relations, 2nd edn, Nelson-Hall, Chicago.

How to get in touch

If you or your NDIS participant need immediate mental healthcare assistance, feel free to get in contact with us on 1800 NEAR ME – admin@therapynearme.com.au