Social observation increases deontological judgments in moral dilemmas

被引:23
|
作者
Lee, Minwoo [1 ,3 ]
Sul, Sunhae [2 ]
Kim, Hackjin [1 ]
机构
[1] Korea Univ, Dept Psychol, 145 Anam Ro, Seoul 136701, South Korea
[2] Pusan Natl Univ, Dept Psychol, Busan, South Korea
[3] Emory Univ, Dept Anthropol, 201 Dowman Dr, Atlanta, GA 30322 USA
基金
新加坡国家研究基金会;
关键词
Reputation concern; Moral dilemma; Social observation; Deontology; Warmth; DECISION-MAKING; SELF-PRESENTATION; HUMAN COOPERATION; IMPRESSION; COMPETENCE; WARMTH; AUTOMATICITY; NEUROSCIENCE; RECIPROCITY; DIMENSIONS;
D O I
10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2018.06.004
中图分类号
B84 [心理学];
学科分类号
04 ; 0402 ;
摘要
A concern for positive reputation is one of the core motivations underlying various social behaviors in humans. The present study investigated how experimentally induced reputation concern modulates judgments in moral dilemmas. In a mixed-design experiment, participants were randomly assigned to the observed vs. the control group and responded to a series of trolley-type moral dilemmas either in the presence or absence of observers, respectively. While no significant baseline difference in personality traits and moral decision tendency were found across two groups of participants, our analyses revealed that social observation promoted deontological judgments especially for moral dilemmas involving direct bodily harm (i.e., personal moral dilemmas), yet with an overall decrease in decision confidence and significant prolongation of reaction time. Moreover, participants in the observed group, but not in the control group, showed the increased sensitivities towards warmth vs. competence traits words in the lexical decision task performed after the moral dilemma task. Our findings suggest that reputation concern, once triggered by the presence of potentially judgmental others, could activate a culturally dominant norm of warmth in various social contexts. This could, in turn, induce a series of goal-directed processes for self-presentation of warmth, leading to increased deontological judgments in moral dilemmas. The results of the present study provide insights into the reputational consequences of moral decisions that merit further exploration.
引用
收藏
页码:611 / 621
页数:11
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Mirror, mirror, on the wall, who is deontological? Completing moral dilemmas in front of mirrors increases deontological but not utilitarian response tendencies
    Reynolds, Caleb J.
    Knighten, Kassidy R.
    Conway, Paul
    COGNITION, 2019, 192
  • [2] When skeptical, stick with the norm: Low dilemma plausibility increases deontological moral judgments
    Koerner, Anita
    Joffe, Susann
    Deutsch, Roland
    JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY, 2019, 84
  • [3] Age differences in utilitarian and deontological moral judgments
    Lin, Xiaotao
    Wu, Yixuan
    Ding, Lei
    Yao, Lin
    Yuan, Bo
    ETHICS & BEHAVIOR, 2024,
  • [4] Moral judgments in social dilemmas: How bad is free riding?
    Cubitt, Robin P.
    Drouvelis, Michalis
    Gaechter, Simon
    Kabalin, Ruslan
    JOURNAL OF PUBLIC ECONOMICS, 2011, 95 (3-4) : 253 - 264
  • [5] The presence of automation enhances deontological considerations in moral judgments
    Schurr, Amos
    Moran, Simone
    COMPUTERS IN HUMAN BEHAVIOR, 2023, 140
  • [6] What makes moral dilemma judgments "utilitarian" or "deontological"?
    Gawronski, Bertram
    Beer, Jennifer S.
    SOCIAL NEUROSCIENCE, 2017, 12 (06) : 626 - 632
  • [7] The presence of automation enhances deontological considerations in moral judgments
    Schurr, Amos
    Moran, Simone
    COMPUTERS IN HUMAN BEHAVIOR, 2023, 140
  • [8] Religiosity enhances emotion and deontological choice in moral dilemmas
    Szekely, Raluca D.
    Opre, Adrian
    Miu, Andrei C.
    PERSONALITY AND INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES, 2015, 79 : 104 - 109
  • [9] Rational intuitions: How reason underlies deontological moral judgments
    Heir, Arjan S.
    PHILOSOPHICAL PSYCHOLOGY, 2023,
  • [10] Moral Judgments of Human vs. AI Agents in Moral Dilemmas
    Zhang, Yuyan
    Wu, Jiahua
    Yu, Feng
    Xu, Liying
    BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES, 2023, 13 (02)