Deontological and utilitarian inclinations in moral decision making: a process dissociation approach.

Dual-process theories of moral judgment suggest that responses to moral dilemmas are guided by two moral principles: the principle of deontology states that the morality of an action depends on the intrinsic nature of the action (e.g., harming others is wrong regardless of its consequences); the principle of utilitarianism implies that the morality of an action is determined by its consequences (e.g., harming others is acceptable if it increases the well-being of a greater number of people). Despite the proposed independence of the moral inclinations reflecting these principles, previous work has relied on operationalizations in which stronger inclinations of one kind imply weaker inclinations of the other kind. The current research applied Jacoby's (1991) process dissociation procedure to independently quantify the strength of deontological and utilitarian inclinations within individuals. Study 1 confirmed the usefulness of process dissociation for capturing individual differences in deontological and utilitarian inclinations, revealing positive correlations of both inclinations to moral identity. Moreover, deontological inclinations were uniquely related to empathic concern, perspective-taking, and religiosity, whereas utilitarian inclinations were uniquely related to need for cognition. Study 2 demonstrated that cognitive load selectively reduced utilitarian inclinations, with deontological inclinations being unaffected. In Study 3, a manipulation designed to enhance empathy increased deontological inclinations, with utilitarian inclinations being unaffected. These findings provide evidence for the independent contributions of deontological and utilitarian inclinations to moral judgments, resolving many theoretical ambiguities implied by previous research.

[1]  Elinor Amit,et al.  You See, the Ends Don’t Justify the Means , 2012, Psychological science.

[2]  Katrin Starcke,et al.  Anticipatory stress interferes with utilitarian moral judgment , 2012, Judgment and Decision Making.

[3]  Daniel M. Bartels,et al.  The mismeasure of morals: Antisocial personality traits predict utilitarian responses to moral dilemmas , 2011, Cognition.

[4]  Ralph Hertwig,et al.  Time and moral judgment , 2011, Cognition.

[5]  Richard L. Lewis,et al.  Divergent effects of different positive emotions on moral judgment , 2011, Cognition.

[6]  Michael D. Buhrmester,et al.  Amazon's Mechanical Turk , 2011, Perspectives on psychological science : a journal of the Association for Psychological Science.

[7]  B. Payne,et al.  Escaping affect: how motivated emotion regulation creates insensitivity to mass suffering. , 2011, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[8]  G. Gigerenzer,et al.  Intuitive and Deliberate Judgments Are Based on Common Principles This Article Has Been Corrected. See Last Page , 2022 .

[9]  M. Mason,et al.  Decision making and testosterone: When the ends justify the means , 2010 .

[10]  Joseph M. Paxton,et al.  Moral Reasoning: Hints and Allegations , 2010, Top. Cogn. Sci..

[11]  W. Hofmann,et al.  Immediate affect as a basis for intuitive moral judgement: An adaptation of the affect misattribution procedure , 2010 .

[12]  G. Pourtois,et al.  The perception and categorisation of emotional stimuli: A review , 2010 .

[13]  L. Surian,et al.  The contact principle and utilitarian moral judgments in young children. , 2010, Developmental science.

[14]  M. Bazerman,et al.  In Favor of Clear Thinking: Incorporating Moral Rules Into a Wise Cost-Benefit Analysis—Commentary on Bennis, Medin, & Bartels (2010) , 2010, Perspectives on psychological science : a journal of the Association for Psychological Science.

[15]  Daniel M. Bartels,et al.  The Costs and Benefits of Calculation and Moral Rules , 2009, Perspectives on psychological science : a journal of the Association for Psychological Science.

[16]  Daniel M. Oppenheimer,et al.  Instructional Manipulation Checks: Detecting Satisficing to Increase Statistical Power , 2009 .

[17]  Jonathan D. Cohen,et al.  Pushing moral buttons: The interaction between personal force and intention in moral judgment , 2009, Cognition.

[18]  Anthony J Bishara,et al.  Dual Process Theories 1 An Integrative Review of Process Dissociation and Related Models in Social Cognition , 2009 .

[19]  Jennifer Lorusso,et al.  Ironic Processes of Mental Control of Action in Tennis , 2009 .

[20]  Karl Aquino,et al.  Beyond Moral Reasoning: A Review of Moral Identity Research and Its Implications for Business Ethics , 2008, Business Ethics Quarterly.

[21]  D. Medin,et al.  Influence of deontological versus consequentialist orientations on act choices and framing effects: when principles are more important than consequences , 2008 .

[22]  Jonathan D. Cohen,et al.  Cognitive load selectively interferes with utilitarian moral judgment , 2008, Cognition.

[23]  Adam B. Moore,et al.  Who Shalt Not Kill? Individual Differences in Working Memory Capacity, Executive Control, and Moral Judgment , 2008, Psychological science.

[24]  Daniel M. Bartels,et al.  Principled moral sentiment and the flexibility of moral judgment and decision making , 2008, Cognition.

[25]  The social intuitionist model: Some counter-intuitions. , 2008 .

[26]  A. Shariff,et al.  PSYCHOLOGICAL SCIENCE Research Article God Is Watching You Priming God Concepts Increases Prosocial Behavior in an Anonymous Economic Game , 2022 .

[27]  Joshua D. Greene Why are VMPFC patients more utilitarian? A dual-process theory of moral judgment explains , 2007, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[28]  Elisa Ciaramelli,et al.  Selective deficit in personal moral judgment following damage to ventromedial prefrontal cortex. , 2007, Social cognitive and affective neuroscience.

[29]  R. Adolphs,et al.  Damage to the prefrontal cortex increases utilitarian moral judgements , 2007, Nature.

[30]  M. Hauser,et al.  The Role of Conscious Reasoning and Intuition in Moral Judgment , 2006, Psychological science.

[31]  B. Payne,et al.  CURRENT DIRECTIONS IN PSYCHOLOGICAL SCIENCE Weapon Bias Split-Second Decisions and Unintended Stereotyping , 2022 .

[32]  Shaun Nichols,et al.  Moral dilemmas and moral rules , 2006, Cognition.

[33]  D. DeSteno,et al.  Manipulations of Emotional Context Shape Moral Judgment , 2006, Psychological science.

[34]  J. Duda,et al.  Goal orientations and moral identity as predictors of prosocial and antisocial functioning in male association football players , 2006, Journal of sports sciences.

[35]  M. Mendez,et al.  An Investigation of Moral Judgement in Frontotemporal Dementia , 2005, Cognitive and behavioral neurology : official journal of the Society for Behavioral and Cognitive Neurology.

[36]  Ilana Ritov,et al.  The ''Identified Victim'' Effect: An Identified Group, or Just a Single Individual? , 2005 .

[37]  R. Krueger,et al.  Genetic and environmental influences on religiousness: findings for retrospective and current religiousness ratings. , 2005, Journal of personality.

[38]  H. D. Saltzstein,et al.  Haidt's Moral Intuitionist Theory: A Psychological and Philosophical Critique , 2004 .

[39]  Andrew D. Engell,et al.  The Neural Bases of Cognitive Conflict and Control in Moral Judgment , 2004, Neuron.

[40]  K. Aquino,et al.  Moral identity and the expanding circle of moral regard toward out-groups. , 2003, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[41]  Paul Bloom,et al.  The intelligence of the moral intuitions: comment on Haidt (2001). , 2003, Psychological review.

[42]  K. Aquino,et al.  The self-importance of moral identity. , 2002, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[43]  D. Stapel,et al.  The effects of diffuse and distinct affect. , 2002, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[44]  L. Jacoby,et al.  Best laid plans: Effects of goals on accessibility bias and cognitive control in race-based misperceptions of weapons , 2002 .

[45]  Shaun Nichols,et al.  Norms with feeling: towards a psychological account of moral judgment , 2002, Cognition.

[46]  A. Yonelinas The Nature of Recollection and Familiarity: A Review of 30 Years of Research , 2002 .

[47]  J. Haidt The emotional dog and its rational tail: a social intuitionist approach to moral judgment. , 2001, Psychological review.

[48]  Jonathan D. Cohen,et al.  An fMRI Investigation of Emotional Engagement in Moral Judgment , 2001, Science.

[49]  L. Jacoby,et al.  Prejudice and perception: the role of automatic and controlled processes in misperceiving a weapon. , 2001, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[50]  Larry L. Jacoby,et al.  Recollection and familiarity: Process-dissociation. , 2000 .

[51]  Larry L. Jacoby,et al.  Recollection and familiarity , 2000 .

[52]  K. Brown,et al.  Does self-regulation require cognitive resources? Evaluation of resource allocation models of goal setting. , 1996, The Journal of applied psychology.

[53]  S. Epstein,et al.  Individual differences in intuitive-experiential and analytical-rational thinking styles. , 1996, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[54]  L. Petrinovich,et al.  Influence of Wording and Framing Effects on Moral Intuitions , 1996 .

[55]  L. Jacoby,et al.  Stroop process dissociations: the relationship between facilitation and interference. , 1994, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[56]  Matthew J. Jorgensen,et al.  An empirical study of moral intuitions: Toward an evolutionary ethics. , 1993 .

[57]  L. Jacoby A process dissociation framework: Separating automatic from intentional uses of memory , 1991 .

[58]  J. Dovidio,et al.  Racial stereotypes: The contents of their cognitive representations☆ , 1986 .

[59]  Mark H. Davis Measuring individual differences in empathy: Evidence for a multidimensional approach. , 1983 .

[60]  C. Batson,et al.  The Religious Experience: A Social-Psychological Perspective , 1982 .

[61]  L. Kohlberg Stage and sequence: The cognitive-developmental approach to socialization , 1969 .

[62]  P. Foot The Problem of Abortion and the Doctrine of the Double Effect , 2020, The Doctrine of Double Effect.