The psychology of moral reasoning
Journal Title: Judgment and Decision Making - Year 2008, Vol 3, Issue 2
Abstract
This article presents a theory of reasoning about moral propositions that is based on four fundamental principles. First, no simple criterion picks out propositions about morality from within the larger set of deontic propositions concerning what is permissible and impermissible in social relations, the law, games, and manners. Second, the mechanisms underlying emotions and deontic evaluations are independent and operate in parallel, and so some scenarios elicit emotions prior to moral evaluations, some elicit moral evaluations prior to emotions, and some elicit them at the same time. Third, deontic evaluations depend on inferences, either unconscious intuitions or conscious reasoning. Fourth, human beliefs about what is, and isn't, moral are neither complete nor consistent. The article marshals the evidence, which includes new studies, corroborating these principles, and discusses the relations between them and other current theories of moral reasoning.
Authors and Affiliations
Monica Bucciarelli, Sangeet Khemlani, and P. N. Johnson-Laird
Keywords
Related Articles
- EP ID EP677609
- DOI -
- Views 169
- Downloads 0
Four challenges for cognitive research on the recognition heuristic and a call for a research strategy shift
The recognition heuristic assumes that people make inferences based on the output of recognition memory. While much work has been devoted to establishing the recognition heuristic as a viable description of how people ma...
The collective intelligence of random small crowds: A partial replication of Kosinski et al. (2012)
We examined the trade-off between the cost of response redundancy and the gain in output quality on the popular crowdsourcing platform Mechanical Turk, as a partial replication of Kosinski et al. (2012) who demonstrated...
Introducing money at any time can reduce discounting in intertemporal choices with rewards: An extension of the upfront money effect
To study intertemporal choices, researchers typically instruct subjects to choose between smaller and sooner (SS) and larger and later (LL) rewards (e.g., gaining CNY 210 in a week vs. gaining CNY 250 in five weeks). Peo...
Decisions by coin toss: Inappropriate but fair
In many situations of indeterminacy, where people agree that no decisive arguments favor one alternative to another, they are still strongly opposed to resolving the dilemma by a coin toss. The robustness of this judgmen...
Diagnostic Task Selection for Strategy Classification in Judgment and Decision Making: Theory, Validation, and Implementation in R
One major statistical and methodological challenge in Judgment and Decision Making research is the reliable identification of individual decision strategies by selection of diagnostic tasks, that is, tasks for which pred...