Judgments made after a moral evaluation are quicker and more extreme than the same judgment based on practical considerations, but morality-based evaluations can be more easily shifted and made with other considerations in mind, according to research published November 28 in the open access journal PLOS ONE by Jay Van Bavel and colleagues from New York University.
Previous research has suggested that moral reasoning usually occurs after a person makes a decision, as a post hoc justification of their choice, rather than the basis for the decision itself. This new study suggests that people can evaluate choices using either moral or non-moral considerations, and this can lead to different choices for the same actions.
For example, participants in the study were given actions that are typically evaluated in a moral context, such as murder, and non-moral actions, such as riding a bike or buying organic food, and asked to evaluate each in both a pragmatic and a moral sense. They were also asked to choose how strongly they would advocate the action to others.
The authors found that participants had different responses to the same decision depending on whether or not it was framed as a moral or pragmatic choice. They found that moral evaluations were faster, more extreme and more strongly associated with universal prescriptions ("everybody/nobody should" statements) than non-moral or pragmatic evaluations of the same actions. In addition, the authors also found that people took longer to decide on such universal prescriptions when asked to evaluate them in a pragmatic rather than moral context.
According to the authors, their results suggest that deciding to frame any issue as moral or not may have important consequences. They say, "Once an issue is declared moral, people's judgments about that issue become more extreme, and they are more likely to apply those judgments to others."
Public Library of Science: http://www.plos.org
This press release was posted to serve as a topic for discussion. Please comment below. We try our best to only post press releases that are associated with peer reviewed scientific literature. Critical discussions of the research are appreciated. If you need help finding a link to the original article, please contact us on twitter or via e-mail.
Like any trench war, the fight to protect America's kids against disease is proceeding only inch by inch. A new report shows why there's reason for hope—and reason for worry
Decontaminating biohazard sites can be a tough job, but the hardest microbe to wash away may not be what you think
The discovery of a possible trigger for the onset of Parkinson's disease could lead to new treatments for patients who still depend on a 50-year-old drug
Many people experience severe anxiety in mundane social situations, such as group introductions or paying bills. Why does this happen? And is there any useful purpose to it?
Along with the usual suspects, cigarettes and booze, the European code for avoiding cancer has been updated to include having the HPV vaccine and breastfeeding
Lose the pounds too fast, gain them all back? It seems not. Crash dieters regain the same amount of lost weight as those taking a longer-term approach
A new study suggests a little spending now can buy you a lot of time later
Researchers have identified a chemical that melanoma cells follow when they spread around the body raising the prospect of eventually switching it off
Some of the planet’s scariest, most lethal viruses find a natural refuge inside bats, including Ebola, rabies, Marburg and the SARS coronavirus. Many high-profile epidemics have been traced back to bats, and scientists are discovering new bat-borne viruses all the time.
Women's voices are often criticized, especially at work. We're called "shrill," told we "lack authority." Here's the story of two women who changed their voices in a quest to be heard.