Lecture 1 Flashcards
Turiel et al (1987)
Moral/conventional task - violations of rule
Signature moral response (SMR)
serious, wrong, bad, punishable, authority independent, appeals to harm
Signature conventional response (SCR)
less serious, less bad, less punishable, authority dependent, no appeals to harm
Haidt, Koller and Dias (1993)
non-harm violations evoke the signature moral response
Kelley, Stich, Haley, Eng and Fessler (2007)
not all harms evoke the signature moral response
Moral foundations
Harm/care Fairness/reciprosity Authority/ respect Ingroup/loyalty Purity/sanctity
Cultural differences
non-weird moralise all five, weird more harm/care, fairness/reciprosity
Moral reasoning
conscious mental activity that consists of transforming given information about people in order to reach a moral judgment, intentional, aware
Moral intuition
sudden appearance in consciousness of a moral judgment, no awareness, no weighing of evidence.
Social Intuitionist Model
Moral judgment is a function of affect-laden intuitions, reasoning is post-hoc rationalisation
Schnall et al 2008
disgust amplifies condemnation
Rozin et al 1999
CAD triad hypothesis
Contempt, Anger, Disgust
Trolley problems
each has a deontological option, and utilitarian option
greene: deontological driven by gut reactions, emotion
Utilitarian is reasoned
Valdesolo and Desteno
Reducing negative affect during dilemma processing one should see more utilitarian responding, SNL
Interferring with reasoning processes
If utilitarian relies on controlled and reasoned responses - should be able to be interferred with with cognitive load not so the deontological processes (yes this is true)
