Moral foundations theory (Haidt & Joseph, 2007)—care, fairness, ingroup loyalty, authority, and purity—has been widely used to examine conservative-liberal ideology. Research in Western contexts generally finds that liberals emphasise individualising values (care and fairness), whereas conservatives distribute endorsement more evenly across the five foundations. In Taiwan, however, political ideology is primarily framed around the Taiwan independence-China unification (IU) divide rather than the conservative-liberal spectrum. Some scholars suggest that independence can be regarded as liberal, while unification and status quo positions align with conservatism, but direct evidence remains limited. This study therefore investigates the intersection of moral foundations, IU attitudes, and liberal-conservative ideology in Taiwan.


Using survey data (N = 1,097), we find that the moral foundations of liberals and conservatives in Taiwan do not fully align with Western patterns. While liberals score significantly higher on care and fairness compared to conservatives—consistent with prior findings—they also score higher on ingroup loyalty, a result opposite to that observed in some Western studies. Moreover, self-identified liberals are strongly associated with Democratic Progressive Party (pro-independence) support and pro-independence attitudes, whereas conservatives are more closely tied to Kuomintang (pro-unification) support and status quo preferences.


We argue that the strong ingroup loyalty among Taiwanese liberals reflects solidarity to challenge the status quo and pursue independence. Thus, care and fairness appear to reflect bottom-up moral intuitions shaping liberal attitudes, while ingroup loyalty in Taiwan reflects a top-down force. Political elite messaging—such as discourse on the "China threat" or "resisting China, safeguarding Taiwan"—may reinforce these ingroup values, leading self-identified liberals to display stronger group solidarity.