Experimental Investigation of the Role of Heuristics in Moral Judgment

One of the most important questions in moral psychology is identifying the underlying process of moral judgment. Some of the recent theories suggest heuristics as a tool for providing a moral decision. The primary aim of the present study was to examine whether heuristics are also included in the pr...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Nermina Mehić, Igor Kardum
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: University of Rijeka 2016-11-01
Series:Psychological Topics
Subjects:
Online Access:http://pt.ffri.hr/index.php/pt/article/view/289
_version_ 1811288578872836096
author Nermina Mehić
Igor Kardum
author_facet Nermina Mehić
Igor Kardum
author_sort Nermina Mehić
collection DOAJ
description One of the most important questions in moral psychology is identifying the underlying process of moral judgment. Some of the recent theories suggest heuristics as a tool for providing a moral decision. The primary aim of the present study was to examine whether heuristics are also included in the process of moral judgment, and not just in moral action. An additional goal was to replicate these effects on a Croatian sample using new stimulus material. Five heuristics were examined: titfor-tat, punishing free-riders in collective actions, incest, luck and effort as cues triggering alternative decision rules and omission. Participants answered to five moral dilemmas, one for each of the aforementioned heuristics. Each dilemma had two versions which differed in the cues that the matching heuristic is assumed to use. The study was carried out on a sample of 84 participants, randomly divided into two experimental groups, which were presented with different versions of the dilemmas. Results only partially confirmed the hypothesis. Three heuristics had an effect on moral judgments – incest and omission heuristics, and tit-for-tat. The effect of incest heuristic was significant only in the male subsample and was opposite from the expected one. Specifically, sexual intercourse between brother and sister, who are not aware of their kinship, is more often found morally unacceptable for males than between two people who grew up believing they are kin. Results for the dilemmas related to omission and tit-for-tat were as hypothesised: not helping someone is approved when the person in need did the same in the last interaction; moral transgression is more often found wrong when it is a result of action rather than omission. <br />
first_indexed 2024-04-13T03:38:40Z
format Article
id doaj.art-ed228bc69b4c4cd1b3e523add1f312a4
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 1332-0742
language English
last_indexed 2024-04-13T03:38:40Z
publishDate 2016-11-01
publisher University of Rijeka
record_format Article
series Psychological Topics
spelling doaj.art-ed228bc69b4c4cd1b3e523add1f312a42022-12-22T03:04:14ZengUniversity of RijekaPsychological Topics1332-07422016-11-01253381403136Experimental Investigation of the Role of Heuristics in Moral JudgmentNermina Mehić0Igor Kardum1Odsjek za psihologiju, Filozofski fakultet Sveučilišta u RijeciOdsjek za psihologiju, Filozofski fakultet Sveučilišta u RijeciOne of the most important questions in moral psychology is identifying the underlying process of moral judgment. Some of the recent theories suggest heuristics as a tool for providing a moral decision. The primary aim of the present study was to examine whether heuristics are also included in the process of moral judgment, and not just in moral action. An additional goal was to replicate these effects on a Croatian sample using new stimulus material. Five heuristics were examined: titfor-tat, punishing free-riders in collective actions, incest, luck and effort as cues triggering alternative decision rules and omission. Participants answered to five moral dilemmas, one for each of the aforementioned heuristics. Each dilemma had two versions which differed in the cues that the matching heuristic is assumed to use. The study was carried out on a sample of 84 participants, randomly divided into two experimental groups, which were presented with different versions of the dilemmas. Results only partially confirmed the hypothesis. Three heuristics had an effect on moral judgments – incest and omission heuristics, and tit-for-tat. The effect of incest heuristic was significant only in the male subsample and was opposite from the expected one. Specifically, sexual intercourse between brother and sister, who are not aware of their kinship, is more often found morally unacceptable for males than between two people who grew up believing they are kin. Results for the dilemmas related to omission and tit-for-tat were as hypothesised: not helping someone is approved when the person in need did the same in the last interaction; moral transgression is more often found wrong when it is a result of action rather than omission. <br />http://pt.ffri.hr/index.php/pt/article/view/289moral judgmentheuristicsecological rationalityincestomissiontit-for-tat
spellingShingle Nermina Mehić
Igor Kardum
Experimental Investigation of the Role of Heuristics in Moral Judgment
Psychological Topics
moral judgment
heuristics
ecological rationality
incest
omission
tit-for-tat
title Experimental Investigation of the Role of Heuristics in Moral Judgment
title_full Experimental Investigation of the Role of Heuristics in Moral Judgment
title_fullStr Experimental Investigation of the Role of Heuristics in Moral Judgment
title_full_unstemmed Experimental Investigation of the Role of Heuristics in Moral Judgment
title_short Experimental Investigation of the Role of Heuristics in Moral Judgment
title_sort experimental investigation of the role of heuristics in moral judgment
topic moral judgment
heuristics
ecological rationality
incest
omission
tit-for-tat
url http://pt.ffri.hr/index.php/pt/article/view/289
work_keys_str_mv AT nerminamehic experimentalinvestigationoftheroleofheuristicsinmoraljudgment
AT igorkardum experimentalinvestigationoftheroleofheuristicsinmoraljudgment