Is saving lives your task or God’s? Religiosity, belief in god, and moral judgment
Journal Title: Judgment and Decision Making - Year 2017, Vol 12, Issue 3
Abstract
Should a Catholic hospital abort a life-threatening pregnancy or let a pregnant woman die? Should a religious employer allow his employees access to contraceptives or break with healthcare legislation? People and organizations of faith often face moral decisions that have significant consequences. Research in psychology found that religion is typically associated with deontological judgment. Yet deontology consists of many principles, which may, at times, conflict. In three studies, we design a conflict between moral principles and find that the relationship between moral judgment and religiosity is more nuanced than currently assumed. Studies 1 and 2 show that, while religious U.S. Christians and Israeli Jews are more likely to form deontological judgments, they divide between the deontological principles of inaction and indirectness. Using textual analysis, we reveal that specific beliefs regarding divine responsibility and human responsibility distinguish inaction from indirectness deontologists. Study 3 exploits natural differences in religious saliency across days of the week to provide causal evidence that religion raises deontological tendencies on Sundays and selectively increases the appeal of inaction deontology for those who believe in an interventionist and responsible God.
Authors and Affiliations
Netta Barak-Corren and Max Bazerman
Keywords
Related Articles
- EP ID EP678294
- DOI -
- Views 136
- Downloads 0
The Regret and Disappointment Scale: An instrument for assessing regret and disappointment in decision making
The present article investigates the effectiveness of methods traditionally used to distinguish between the emotions of regret and disappointment and presents a new method — the Regret and Disappointment Scale (RDS) — fo...
Debiasing context effects in strategic decisions: Playing against a consistent opponent can correct perceptual but not reinforcement biases
Vlaev and Chater (2006) demonstrated that the cooperativeness of previously seen prisoner’s dilemma games biases choices and predictions in the current game. These effects were: a) assimilation to the mean cooperativenes...
How do jurors argue with one another?
We asked jurors awaiting trial assignment to listen to a recorded synopsis of an authentic criminal trial and to make a choice among 4 verdict possibilities. Each participant juror then deliberated with another juror who...
The glow of grime: Why cleaning an old object can wash away its value
For connoisseurs of antiques and antiquities, cleaning old objects can reduce their value. In five experiments (total N = 1,019), we show that lay people also often judge that old objects are worth less when cleaned, and...
Approximating rationality under incomplete information: Adaptive inferences for missing cue values based on cue-discrimination
In a highly uncertain world, individuals often have to make decisions in situations with incomplete information. We investigated in three experiments how partial cue information is treated in complex probabilistic infere...