期刊
FRONTIERS IN PSYCHOLOGY
卷 4, 期 -, 页码 -出版社
FRONTIERS MEDIA SA
DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00250
关键词
moral cognition; dilemma; utilitarianism; affective proximity; decision making
Everyone has experienced the potential discrepancy between what one judges as morally acceptable and what one actually does when a choice between alternative behaviors is to be made. The present study explores empirically whether judgment and choice of action differ when people make decisions on dilemmas involving moral issues. Two hundred and forty participants evaluated 24 moral and non-moral dilemmas either by judging (Is it acceptable to ... ) or reporting the choice of action they would make (Would you do ... ). We also investigated the influence of varying the number of people benefiting from the decision and the closeness of relationship of the decision maker with the potential victim on these two types of decision. Variations in the number of beneficiaries from the decision did not influence judgment nor choice of action. By contrast, closeness of relationship with the victim had a greater influence on the choice of action than on judgment. This differentiation between evaluative judgments and choices of action argues in favor of each of them being supported by (at least partially) different psychological processes.
作者
我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。
推荐
暂无数据