Social cognition of moral judgment
Social cognition of moral judgment
Moral judgment often examines sacrificial dilemmas where causing limited harm will prevent greater harm. Such dilemmas entail a trade-off between moral concerns about avoiding harming others and concerns about maximizing overall well-being. Such dilemmas originated in philosophy, but research examines the psychological mechanisms that drive judgments. Yet, theorists often conflate philosophical theory with dilemma decisions and decisions with underlying mechanisms. This chapter discusses the origins of dilemma research and distinguishes between philosophical, judgment, and process levels of analysis. It considers the original "hard" dual-process model and a "softer" version that better meshes with evidence, as well as single-process models and social perception models. The chapter tours evidence obtained by examining judgments and via the process dissociation and consequences norms inaction modeling approaches. Finally, it considers the dangers of mixing levels of analysis and the utility of clarity for the goals of dilemma research.
Deontology, Dual-Process Model, Moral Dilemma, Multinomial Modeling, Philosophy, Process Dissociation, Sacrificial Dilemma, Utilitarianism
740-770
Arnold; Oxford University Press
Conway, Paul
765aaaf9-173f-44cf-be9a-c8ffbb51e286
21 August 2024
Conway, Paul
765aaaf9-173f-44cf-be9a-c8ffbb51e286
Conway, Paul
(2024)
Social cognition of moral judgment.
In,
Carlston, Donal E., Hugenberg, Kurt and Johnson, Kerri L.
(eds.)
The Oxford Handbook of Social Cognition.
2 ed.
Arnold; Oxford University Press, .
(doi:10.1093/oxfordhb/9780197763414.013.27).
Record type:
Book Section
Abstract
Moral judgment often examines sacrificial dilemmas where causing limited harm will prevent greater harm. Such dilemmas entail a trade-off between moral concerns about avoiding harming others and concerns about maximizing overall well-being. Such dilemmas originated in philosophy, but research examines the psychological mechanisms that drive judgments. Yet, theorists often conflate philosophical theory with dilemma decisions and decisions with underlying mechanisms. This chapter discusses the origins of dilemma research and distinguishes between philosophical, judgment, and process levels of analysis. It considers the original "hard" dual-process model and a "softer" version that better meshes with evidence, as well as single-process models and social perception models. The chapter tours evidence obtained by examining judgments and via the process dissociation and consequences norms inaction modeling approaches. Finally, it considers the dangers of mixing levels of analysis and the utility of clarity for the goals of dilemma research.
This record has no associated files available for download.
More information
Published date: 21 August 2024
Additional Information:
Publisher Copyright:
© Oxford University Press 2024.
Keywords:
Deontology, Dual-Process Model, Moral Dilemma, Multinomial Modeling, Philosophy, Process Dissociation, Sacrificial Dilemma, Utilitarianism
Identifiers
Local EPrints ID: 495995
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/495995
PURE UUID: 5cb81e56-5798-409e-b38a-7e76ffbe7340
Catalogue record
Date deposited: 29 Nov 2024 16:02
Last modified: 30 Nov 2024 03:11
Export record
Altmetrics
Contributors
Author:
Paul Conway
Editor:
Donal E. Carlston
Editor:
Kurt Hugenberg
Editor:
Kerri L. Johnson
Download statistics
Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.
View more statistics