Alle Publikationen
- <<
- <
- 1
2017
-
(2017): Moral alchemy. How love changes norms. In: Cognition 167, S. 135-150. DOI: 10.1016/j.cognition.2017.03.003
DOI: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28404207 Abstract: We discuss a process by which non-moral concerns (that is concerns agreed to be non-moral within a particular cultural context) can take on moral content. We refer to this phenomenon as moral alchemy and suggest that it arises because moral obligations of care entail recursively valuing loved ones' values, thus allowing propositions with no moral weight in themselves to become morally charged. Within this framework, we predict that when people believe a loved one cares about a behavior more than they do themselves, the moral imperative to care about the loved one's interests will raise the value of that behavior, such that people will be more likely to infer that third parties will see the behavior as wrong (Experiment 1) and the behavior itself as more morally important (Experiment 2) than when the same behaviors are considered outside the context of a caring relationship. The current study confirmed these predictions. zitiert von: 2
2016
-
(2016): How prescriptive norms influence causal inferences. In: Cognition 156, S. 164-176. DOI: 10.1016/j.cognition.2016.07.007
DOI: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27591550 Abstract: Recent experimental findings suggest that prescriptive norms influence causal inferences. The cognitive mechanism underlying this finding is still under debate. We compare three competing theories: The culpable control model of blame argues that reasoners tend to exaggerate the causal influence of norm-violating agents, which should lead to relatively higher causal strength estimates for these agents. By contrast, the counterfactual reasoning account of causal selection assumes that norms do not alter the representation of the causal model, but rather later causal selection stages. According to this view, reasoners tend to preferentially consider counterfactual states of abnormal rather than normal factors, which leads to the choice of the abnormal factor in a causal selection task. A third view, the accountability hypothesis, claims that the effects of prescriptive norms are generated by the ambiguity of the causal test question. Asking whether an agent is a cause can be understood as a request to assess her causal contribution but also her moral accountability. According to this theory norm effects on causal selection are mediated by accountability judgments that are not only sensitive to the abnormality of behavior but also to mitigating factors, such as intentionality and knowledge of norms. Five experiments are presented that favor the accountability account over the two alternative theories.
Keywords: Adult, Female, Humans, Judgment, Male, Moral, Moral Obligations, Morals, Normen, Social Norms
- <<
- <
- 1