Mechanisms of Moral Disengagement in the Exercise of Moral Agency

This research examined the role of mechanisms of moral disengagement in the exercise of moral agency. Regulatory self-sanctions can be selectively disengaged from detrimental conduct by converting harmful acts to moral ones through linkage to worthy purposes, obscuring personal causal agency by diffusion and displacement of responsibility, misrepresenting or disregarding the injurious effects inflicted on others, and vilifying the recipients of maltreatment by blaming and dehumanizing them. The study examined the structure and impact of moral disengagement on detrimental conduct and the psychological processes through which it exerts its effects. Path analyses reveal that moral disengagement fosters detrimental conduct by reducing prosocialness and anticipatory self-censure and by promoting cognitive and affective reactions conducive to aggression. The structure of the paths of influence is very similar for interpersonal aggression and delinquent conduct. Although the various mechanisms of moral disengagement operate in concert, moral reconstruals of harmful conduct by linking it to worthy purposes and vilification of victims seem to contribute most heavily to engagement in detrimental activities. Psychological theories of moral agency focus heavily on moral thought to the neglect of moral conduct. The limited attention to moral conduct reflects both the rationalistic bias of many theories of morality (Kohlberg, 1984) and the convenience of investigatory method. It is much easier to examine how people reason about hypothetical moral dilemmas than to study how they behave in difficult life predicaments. People suffer from the wrongs done to them, regardless of how perpetrators might justify their inhumane actions. The regulation of conduct involves much more than moral reasoning. A theory of morality must specify the mechanisms by which people come to live in accordance with moral standards. In social cognitive theory (Bandura, 1991), moral reasoning is translated into actions through self-regulatory mechanisms through which moral agency is exercised. In the course of socialization , moral standards are constructed from information conveyed by direct tuition, evaluative social reactions to one's conduct, and exposure to the selfevaluative standards modeled by others. Once formed, such standards serve as guides and deterrents for action. People regulate their actions by the consequences they apply to them

[1]  W. Reich Origins of Terrorism: Psychologies, Ideologies, Theologies, States of Mind , 1998 .

[2]  P. Zimbardo The Psychology of Evil : A Situationist Perspective on Recruiting Good People to Engage in Anti-Social Acts , 1995 .

[3]  Dov Cohen,et al.  Self-Protection and the Culture of Honor: Explaining Southern Violence , 1994 .

[4]  T. Gabor Everybody Does It!: Crime by the Public , 1994 .

[5]  C. Barbaranelli,et al.  Individual differences in the study of human aggression , 1994 .

[6]  K. Dodge,et al.  A review and reformulation of social information-processing mechanisms in children's social adjustment. , 1994 .

[7]  B. Weiner,et al.  Conservatism and Perceptions of Poverty: An Attributional Analysis1 , 1993 .

[8]  Gian Vittorio Caprara,et al.  Early emotional instability, prosocial behaviour, and aggression: some methodological aspects , 1993 .

[9]  A. Bandura Social cognitive theory of social referencing. , 1992 .

[10]  S. Feinman Social Referencing and the Social Construction of Reality in Infancy , 1992 .

[11]  A. Bandura Social cognitive theory of moral thought and action. , 1991 .

[12]  D. G. Perry,et al.  Peers' perceptions of the consequences that victimized children provide aggressors. , 1990, Child development.

[13]  L. Berkowitz,et al.  On the formation and regulation of anger and aggression. A cognitive-neoassociationistic analysis. , 1990, The American psychologist.

[14]  H. Kelman,et al.  Crimes of obedience: Toward a social psychology of authority and responsibility. , 1990 .

[15]  David C. Rapoport,et al.  The Morality of Terrorism: Religious and Secular Justifications , 1989 .

[16]  Scott D. Gest,et al.  Social networks and aggressive behavior: Peer support or peer rejection? , 1988 .

[17]  C. Laird,et al.  The Legacy of language : a tribute to Charlton Laird , 1987 .

[18]  M. Kramer The moral logic of Hizballah , 1987 .

[19]  William D. Lutz,et al.  Language, Appearance and Reality: Doublespeak in 1984. , 1987 .

[20]  T. Achenbach,et al.  Child/adolescent behavioral and emotional problems: implications of cross-informant correlations for situational specificity. , 1987, Psychological bulletin.

[21]  Carol Sherman The Psychology of Moral Development. Vol. 2: The Nature and Validity of Moral Stages. Lawrence Kohlberg , 1986 .

[22]  G. Caprara,et al.  Interpolating physical exercise between instigation to aggress and aggression: the role of irritability and emotional susceptibility , 1986 .

[23]  B. Weiner An attributional theory of motivation and emotion , 1986 .

[24]  A. Bandura Social Foundations of Thought and Action: A Social Cognitive Theory , 1985 .

[25]  G. Caprara Effect of insult and dissipation–rumination on delayed aggression and hostility. , 1985 .

[26]  I. Charny The morality of terrorism: Religious and secular justifications, by David C. Rapaport and Yonah Alexander. Pergamon, New York, 1982, $35.00 , 1985 .

[27]  G. Caprara,et al.  The eliciting cue value of aggressive slides reconsidered in a personological perspective: The weapons effect and irritability , 1984 .

[28]  L. Kohlberg The Psychology Of Moral Development , 1984 .

[29]  W. Lutz LANGUAGE, APPEARANCE, AND REALITY : Doublespeak in 1984t , 1984 .

[30]  R. Geen,et al.  Aggression : theoretical and empirical reviews , 1983 .

[31]  G. Travaglia,et al.  Instigation to aggress and escalation of aggression examined from a personological perspective: The role of irritability and of emotional susceptibility , 1983 .

[32]  Craig A. Smith,et al.  The structure of self-reports of emotional responses to film segments , 1982 .

[33]  D. Bolinger Language – The Loaded Weapon , 1980 .

[34]  C. Helm,et al.  Stanley Milgram and the Obedience Experiment , 1979 .

[35]  C. Edelbrock,et al.  The classification of child psychopathology: a review and analysis of empirical efforts. , 1978, Psychological bulletin.

[36]  M. Zanna,et al.  Intentions and Their Contexts in the Moral Judgments of Children and Adults. , 1978 .

[37]  E. Diener Deindividuation: Causes and Consequences. , 1977 .

[38]  A. Bandura,et al.  Disinhibition of aggression through diffusion of responsibility and dehumanization of victims , 1975 .

[39]  A. L. Beaman,et al.  Effects of altered responsibility, congnitive set, and modeling on physical aggression and deindividuation. , 1975, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[40]  S. Milgram Obedience to Authority: An Experimental View , 1975 .

[41]  Herbert G. Kelman Violence without Moral Restraint: Reflections on the Dehumanization of Victims and Victimizers , 1973 .

[42]  A. Bandura Aggression: a social learning analysis , 1971 .

[43]  C. Comstock,et al.  Sanctions for Evil , 1971 .

[44]  H. Tilker Socially responsible behavior as a function of observer responsibility and victim feedback. , 1970 .

[45]  P. Zimbardo The human choice: Individuation, reason, and order versus deindividuation, impulse, and chaos. , 1969 .

[46]  A. Buss,et al.  EFFECTS OF JUSTIFICATION FOR AGGRESSION AND COMMUNICATION WITH THE VICTIM ON POSTAGGRESSION DISSONANCE. , 1964, Journal of abnormal psychology.

[47]  A. Buss,et al.  Dissonance, aggression, and evaluation of pain. , 1962, Journal of abnormal and social psychology.