Worrying about what other people think of a person, because of the notorious “what would they say”, is a social behavior that occurs more often in small towns or communities, which has less effect when living in a big city. So far, nothing new. Nor will we reveal anything to you if we tell you that concern for protecting reputation and public image is a factor that generates a great deal of social pressure, but none of these has been proven until now by scientific methodology.

A group of researchers from the University of Canterbury, in England, have explored the former “map of morality” in a study with nearly 120,000 people from 60 countries in which the aim was to verify whether small rural communities differ in social visibility from larger cities, and if members of the former perceive their reputation and image as more vulnerable and whether they care more about protecting it than the latter.

Previous sociological studies have shown that individuals feel more socially connected within their communities because they are more likely to know their neighbors, have a history of growing up with them, and have closer social bonds with them. In addition, communities that have high social connections tend to also have high social visibility: people who are closely related to each other tend to see and be aware of what others are doing. In communities with high social visibility, reputations may be more vulnerable to gossip because people are more easily recognized in everyday actions. In contrast, urban communities are larger and more dispersed, with fewer people able to cater to the majority of individuals in the community. Hence, urban areas are almost certainly less socially connected and individual actions less socially visible.

This cross-sectional analysis found that imagining being in a small rural community with high social visibility caused people to report greater concern for reputation, which influenced behaviors such as refusing to increase product prices in business, compared to those who imagined living in a large urban community without Name.

“Cultural differences have been observed between areas with historically high population densities and areas with low population densities. For example, strict social norms and penalties for breaking them, as measured by cultural rigidity, are associated with areas with higher social densities. stronger norms may be a cultural adaptation to unique challenges, as countries with higher cultural stickiness indexes have fewer natural resources, greater food shortages, and less access to clean water,” the researchers wrote.

“Humans are rational beings who respond strategically to their environment. People know that their actions are most visible and their reputations are most vulnerable in smaller, more socially connected communities. The level of care and the number of sacrifices they are willing to make to protect their reputation corresponds to degree of vulnerability in their social environment,” they added

This work has implications for understanding how cultural and moral differences between regions may emerge from the geographical features of the region.