Moral judgment reloaded: a moral dilemma validation study
Open Access
- 1 July 2014
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Frontiers Media SA in Frontiers in Psychology
- Vol. 5, 607
Abstract
We propose a revised set of moral dilemmas for studies on moral judgment. We selected a total of 46 moral dilemmas available in the literature and fine-tuned them in terms of four conceptual factors (Personal Force, Benefit Recipient, Evitability and Intention) and methodological aspects of the dilemma formulation (word count, expression style, question formats) that have been shown to influence moral judgment. Second, we obtained normative codings of arousal and valence for each dilemma showing that emotional arousal in response to moral dilemmas depends crucially on the factors Personal Force, Benefit Recipient, and Intentionality. Third, we validated the dilemma set confirming that people's moral judgment is sensitive to all four conceptual factors, and to their interactions. Results are discussed in the context of this field of research, outlining also the relevance of our RT effects for the Dual Process account of moral judgment. Finally, we suggest tentative theoretical avenues for future testing, particularly stressing the importance of the factor Intentionality in moral judgment. Additionally, due to the importance of cross-cultural studies in the quest for universals in human moral cognition, we provide the new set dilemmas in six languages (English, French, German, Spanish, Catalan and Danish). The norming values provided here refer to the Spanish dilemma set.Keywords
This publication has 38 references indexed in Scilit:
- Discrepancies between Judgment and Choice of Action in Moral DilemmasFrontiers in Psychology, 2013
- What we say and what we do: The relationship between real and hypothetical moral choicesCognition, 2012
- Individual differences in sensitivity to reward and punishment predict moral judgmentPersonality and Individual Differences, 2011
- A Psychophysiological Investigation of Moral Judgment after Ventromedial Prefrontal DamageJournal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 2010
- Brain Switches Utilitarian Behavior: Does Gender Make the Difference?PLOS ONE, 2010
- Gender-related differences in moral judgmentsCognitive Processing, 2009
- Pushing moral buttons: The interaction between personal force and intention in moral judgmentCognition, 2009
- Damage to the prefrontal cortex increases utilitarian moral judgementsNature, 2007
- Throwing a Bomb on a Person Versus Throwing a Person on a BombPsychological Science, 2007
- Killing, Letting Die, and the Trolley ProblemThe Monist, 1976