The relevance of moral norms in distinct relational contexts: Purity versus harm norms regulate self-directed actions
نویسندگان
چکیده
Recent efforts to partition the space of morality have focused on the descriptive content of distinct moral domains (e.g., harm versus purity), or alternatively, the relationship between the perpetrator and victim of moral violations. Across three studies, we demonstrate that harm and purity norms are relevant in distinct relational contexts. Moral judgments of purity violations, compared to harm violations, are relatively more sensitive to the negative impact perpetrators have on themselves versus other victims (Study 1). This pattern replicates across a wide array of harm and purity violations varying in severity (Studies 2 and 3). Moreover, while perceptions of harm predict moral judgment consistently across relational contexts, perceptions of purity predict moral judgment more for self-directed actions, where perpetrators violate themselves, compared to dyadic actions, where perpetrators violate other victims (Study 3). Together, these studies reveal how an action's content and its relational context interact to influence moral judgment, providing novel insights into the adaptive functions of harm and purity norms.
منابع مشابه
When Mental States Matter, When They Don’t, and What That Means for Morality
Research has shown that moral judgments depend on the capacity to engage in mental state reasoning. In this article, we will first review behavioral and neural evidence for the role of mental states (e.g., people’s beliefs, desires, intentions) in judgments of right and wrong. Second, we will consider cases where mental states appear at first to matter less (i.e., when people assign moral blame...
متن کاملWhen ignorance is no excuse: Different roles for intent across moral domains.
A key factor in legal and moral judgments is intent. Intent differentiates, for instance, murder from manslaughter. Is this true for all moral judgments? People deliver moral judgments of many kinds of actions, including harmful actions (e.g., assault) and purity violations (e.g., incest, consuming taboo substances). We show that intent is a key factor for moral judgments of harm, but less of a...
متن کاملWhat Determines a Moral Domain ? 3
Recent work has distinguished “harm” from “purity” violations, but how does an act get classified as belonging to a domain in the first place? We demonstrate the impact of not only the kind of action (e.g., harmful versus impure) but also its target (e.g., oneself versus another). Across two experiments, common signatures of harm and purity tracked with other-directed and self-directed actions,...
متن کاملHarming Ourselves and Defiling Others: What Determines a Moral Domain?
Recent work has distinguished "harm" from "purity" violations, but how does an act get classified as belonging to a domain in the first place? We demonstrate the impact of not only the kind of action (e.g., harmful versus impure) but also its target (e.g., oneself versus another). Across two experiments, common signatures of harm and purity tracked with other-directed and self-directed actions,...
متن کاملABSTRACT Title of thesis: WHEN APOLOGIES WORK: THE BENEFITS OF MATCHING APOLOGY CONTENT TO VICTIMS AND CONTEXT
Title of thesis: WHEN APOLOGIES WORK: THE BENEFITS OF MATCHING APOLOGY CONTENT TO VICTIMS AND CONTEXT Ryan Fehr, Master of Arts, 2007 Thesis Directed by: Dr. Michele Gelfand Department of Psychology Research shows that apologies are useful social tools. They help people to resolve conflict, reduce feelings of aggression, and foster forgiveness. Yet common sense tells us that all apologies are n...
متن کامل