morality
= interlocking sets of values, practices, institutions and evolved psychological mechanisms that work together to suppress or regulate selfishness and make a social life possible
- process of determining what is right or wrong / good or bad
moral identity
= moral trait associations that define a person’s moral character; whether moral self-schema is central to person’s self-definition
moral identity
- two dimensions
- internalisation = private aspect; captures subjective experience of having a moral identity
- -> reflecting about distant moral behaviour (internalisation) increases prosocial motivations - symbolisation = public aspect; captures importance a person places on exhibiting a public moral self as a way of affirming one’s morality (partly driven by impression management, self-verification motives)
- -> reflecting about recent moral behaviour (symbolisation) decreases prosocial intentions
social-cognitive model of moral identity
= assumes that a person’s moral identity can be both persistently accessible and temporarily salient
moral identity
- circle of moral regard
- people whose moral identities are more accessible within the working self-concept are more likely to behave in a manner consistent with their conceptions of morality
- in-group members are likely to fall into one’s moral circle: must not be exclusive –> people with a strong moral identity also incorporate out-group members into their circle
moral identity
- prescriptive moral regulation
= doing good deeds; charitable giving, helping behaviours
- high internalisers: stronger sense of obligation to show moral concern about socially distant others
- -> giving time (preferred) & money to out-groups but not in-groups
- -> sensitive to moral cues in environments (e.g. job search)
- -> more sceptical when evaluating potential beneficiaries of their good deeds
- moral primes strongest effect on LOW internalisers
- internalisation primacy principle (IPP) = internalisation more important than symbolisation when it comes to impact of moral cues
- -> symbolisation more important when internalisation is low
moral identity
- proscriptive more regulation
= prevent bad behaviour; cheating, interpersonal mistreatment, retaliatory behaviours
- high symbolisers: more resistant to influence of processing frames when evaluating unfair acts toward others but also magnify retaliatory/punitive reactions to mistreatment by others
- moral primes have strongest effect on HIGH internalisers
- internalisation-symbolisation equality principle (ISEP) = internalisation & symbolisation both shape how individuals react to cues in their environment
moral foundations theory
= 5 psychological moral foundations on which most cultures/individuals build their systems of morality
binding foundations
- have both a positive and a negative site
- cover a group- or collective-orientated view of morality
1. loyalty/ betrayal: commitment to our social group
2. authority/ subversion
3. purity/sanity: moral reactions of disgust against spiritual/physical contagions
individualising foundations
- focus on provision and protection of rights
4. care/ harm: prohibitions against harm
5. fairness/ cheating: reciprocal altruism
moral motives
- relationship regulation theory
= any action may be perceived as morally correct depending on moral motive and how relevant social relationship is
moral motives
- relational models theory
= employ four mental models/motive that coordinate nearly all social interactions
- moral motive responsible for guiding our moral judgement + behaviour
- null morality = lack of any kind of relationship leads to moral indifference
- conflicting moralities = conflicting judgements come from the constitution of different social-relational models + motives for otherwise identical situation –> interpret actions differently
- adds to MFT: grounding foundations in a theory of social relationships –> predict when + how people rely on one foundation over another
relational models theory
- UNITY
mental model = communal sharing
= perceive people in same group as undifferentiated + equivalent in a salient feature
- care for/support integrity of in-group through sense of collective responsibility + common fate
- in-group: within the scope of moral concern; preferential treatment
- collective responsibility for wrongdoing
- honour cultures: when relationship violated the only way to remove families shame is to kill the “polluted” women
relational models theory
- HIERARCHY
mental model = authority ranking
- rank people along particular dimension –> to know relative positions
- expectations that individuals at the top are entitled to more/better things than those at the bottom
- also morally responsible for the actions of their subordinates
- coupled with unity: motivates to put in-group at top + out-group at bottom
relational models theory
- EQUALITY
mental model = equality matching
- moral motive: reciprocity + revenge
- -> only motive that allows fairness
- attend to differences in order to achieve/maintain balance
relational models theory
- PROPORTIONALITY
mental model = market
- compare/ensure that rewards/punishments for each party are proportional to their costs/contributions/effort/guilt
- primary violation: cheating (= attempt to gain benefits that aren’t proportional to what one deserves)
moral reasoning
= the process by which individuals try to determine the difference between what’s right or wrong
- reason-responsive behaviour: need ability to be receptive to reasons (e.g. taking drugs disrupts life) and translate those into choices & subsequent behaviour (“don’t god damn do it”)
- often based on emotion not logic
- -> moral dumbfounding: people often reach strong moral conclusions they cannot logically defend
moral reasoning
- deontology
= uses rules to distinguish right from wrong; rule-based;
- right doesn’t necessarily maximise the good
- focus on negative obligations: urges moral agent to avoid aiming to do harm (doing good is good but avoiding evil is paramount)
- moral agents have special duties to those close to them (preferential treatment)
- agent-relative: each person is responsible for moral value of own action
- doing vs. allowing: actively harming is worse than allowing harm to occur
- doctrine of double effects: action intended to do harm (even if it doesn’t work out) is morally worse than an action that produces unintended but foreseen harm
–> explains trolley dilemma: people would divert the trolley but not push the man
x possibly disregard consequences of our actions when determining what’s right/wrong
moral reasoning
- utilitarianism
= consequentialism = determine right/wrong by focusing on outcomes; reason-based
- most ethical choice = the one that produces the greatest good for the greatest number
- agent-neutral: what is right for one is right for everyone in the group
- doing vs. allowing: irrelevant
x can’t always tell consequences in advance
x can’t account for justice/individual rights
x can’t explain group biases
moral judgment
= outcome of moral reasoning
- deontology: motivation behind action is more important than real outcome/consequences
- -> moral rules, anticipated consequences, evaluations of intentions, ability to act freely & emotions all feed into moral judgements (bidirectionally)
- utilitarianism: make judgment so the outcome produces the greatest good to the most person
factors influencing moral reasoning
- empathy
= provides the emotional fire and a push toward seeing a victim’s suffering end (irrespective of group)
- morality + empathy: two independent motives, with its own unique goal
- trolley dilemma: two tracks, one with 6 people, one with 1 person, or push large man in front of trolley
- compares impersonal/personal moral decision making
- utilitarian reasoning
- -> lower levels of dispositional concern = higher utilitarian moral judgement (more rational, calculating)
empathy
- emotional component
= capacity to share and become affectively aroused by others’ emotions
- motivation to care & help others in distress (independent of perspective taking)
- highly empathic = more readily aroused by others distress/own arousal
- automatic
empathy
- motivational component
- empathic concern = urge of caring for another’s welfare
- integral for maintaining social relationships (attachment)
- lack of empathic concern: diminishes aversion of harming others
empathy
- cognitive component
= perspective taking
- strategy for reducing group biases
factors influencing moral reasoning
- stress
- preferentially activate regions involved in emotional processing
- more stress = less utilitarian response
- support for Greene’s dual process theory
- -> stress gives preference to “automatic” emotional system
factors influencing moral reasoning
- sleep
- lack of sleep = lower moral awareness
- affects glucose and pre-frontal cortex
- moral attentiveness: extent to which an individual chronically defines moral judgment
