This study is the first attempt to experimentally test whether purity concerns drive social distance. Social scientists have long recognized the importance of homophily -- that “birds of a feather flock together” (c.f., McPherson et al., 2001). More recently, some scholars have begun to investigate moral homophily (e.g., Vaisey and Lizardo 2010), but this work has been limited by its reliance on coarse measures of both morality and network structure without specificity as to what moral concerns matter most and how these concerns affect social connectedness. The current study hopes to register the research hypothesis, materials, and analysis plan prior to data collection to attempt to test this relationship and identify which moral domains most affect social distancing. **Hypothesis: ** 1. We hypothesize that perceived differences in purity concerns between an individual and another person will be the strongest predictor of social distancing preferences for the individual compared to differences in the other 4 moral foundation domains. **Procedure:** 300 Adult, American, MTurk participants (60 per condition) will complete the study online through the survey website Qualtrics.com. They will take a survey about their own moral concerns and then will be asked to evaluate how close or distant they wish to be from another person who differs in concern withing varying domains. Study 1 will be a 5 condition design wherein participants will randomly receive one of five moral domains (Care, Fairness, Loyalty, Authority, or Sanctity; Moral Foundations Theory; Graham et al., 2013) highlighted as different between the participant and the fictional person they are evaluating when they are told to evaluate a potential communication partner. Mturk participants will first answer 20 questions wherein they will be asked to make 4 moral judgments from each of the 5 moral foundations. All items from each foundation will be presented together, and the order of foundations will be randomized. For each item, participants will indicate how morally wrong they view each action which violates a moral concern in one of the five moral foundation domains from Moral Foundation Theory: Care/harm, Fairness/cheating, Loyalty/betrayal, Authority/subversion, and Sanctity/degradation. All foundation items have been pretested to match for average wrongness and arousal so as to avoid cross-foundation comparison concerns. After completing the moral judgment questions, participants will be provided information about their score compatibility with a fictional participant who has also taken the scale. All participants will be told that their scores are highly similar to the other person’s scores for four out of the five domains. However, for the fifth domain, participants will be randomly assigned to one of five conditions in which they are told that their scores are significantly different (in terms of percent similarity) for either Care/harm, Fairness/cheating, Loyalty/betrayal, Authority/subversion, or Sanctity/degradation. For example, a participant in the Harm condition would receive the following feedback. “ Thank you for completing our questions about moral scenarios. In the future, we intend to place participants into discussion pairs based on their compatibility. Based on your responses, we have paired you with another participant who has also completed this scale. We would like feedback about how you would feel about talking with another participant who has the following compatibility with you: Your responses were highly similar for concerns of fairness (89% similarity), Loyalty (96% similarity), Authority (93% similarity), and Sanctity (94% similarity). You differed, however, on your responses for concerns of harm (24%). “ Participants would then answer two questions developed to assess social distance: how close to that person they would be willing to sit on a bench and the Bogardus social distance scale. The average of these social distance items will be calculated and the two items will also be individually assessed. **Analysis Plan:** The following participants will be removed from analysis: 1. Repeat IP addresses (to avoid participants taking the same study multiple times) 2. Participants who fail the attention check item. 3. Participants who fail the manipulation check (i.e., dont know what dimension they and the other person's profile differed on) 4. Participants who do not complete both the moral judgment and the Social Distance items. Prior to analysis, the 5 moral domain scores will be calcuated by taking the mean score of the 4 items within each foundation domain. Overall social distance will be calcuated by taking the average of the 2 social distance questions. Confirmatory analyses will test our hypothesis using an ANOVA design and followup protected t-tests if the ANOVA result is significant. **Secondary Analyses:** 1. It is also possible that purity concerns will only predict outcomes for individuals who typically care about these concerns (and therefore think the other person in this study would violate them) but not for those who do not care about these concerns (and therefore think the other person in the study would not violate them). An additional analysis will control for average purity domain scores to see if the strength of this domain's score affects the relationship between condition and outcome. If this is the case, an additional studies would need to be conducted to further test causal hypotheses.