Intellectually Rigorous but Morally Tolerant: Exploring Moral Leniency as a Mediator Between Cognitive Style and “Utilitarian” Judgment

IF 2.3 2区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL
Manon D. Gouiran, Florian Cova
{"title":"Intellectually Rigorous but Morally Tolerant: Exploring Moral Leniency as a Mediator Between Cognitive Style and “Utilitarian” Judgment","authors":"Manon D. Gouiran,&nbsp;Florian Cova","doi":"10.1111/cogs.70024","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Past research on people's moral judgments about moral dilemmas has revealed a connection between utilitarian judgment and reflective cognitive style. This has traditionally been interpreted as reflection is conducive to utilitarianism. However, recent research shows that the connection between reflective cognitive style and utilitarian judgments holds only when participants are asked whether the utilitarian option is permissible, and disappears when they are asked whether it is recommended. To explain this phenomenon, we propose that reflective cognitive style is associated with a greater moral leniency—that is, a greater tendency to be tolerant of moral violations, and that moral leniency predicts utilitarian judgment when utilitarian judgment is measured through permissibility. In Study 1 (<i>N</i> = 192), we design a set of vignettes to assess moral leniency. In Studies 2 and 3 (<i>N</i> = 455, 428), we show that reflective cognitive style is indeed associated with greater moral leniency, and that moral leniency mediates the connection between cognitive style and utilitarian judgment. We discuss the implication of our results for the interpretation of the relationship between utilitarianism and reflective cognitive style.</p>","PeriodicalId":48349,"journal":{"name":"Cognitive Science","volume":"48 12","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/cogs.70024","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cognitive Science","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/cogs.70024","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Past research on people's moral judgments about moral dilemmas has revealed a connection between utilitarian judgment and reflective cognitive style. This has traditionally been interpreted as reflection is conducive to utilitarianism. However, recent research shows that the connection between reflective cognitive style and utilitarian judgments holds only when participants are asked whether the utilitarian option is permissible, and disappears when they are asked whether it is recommended. To explain this phenomenon, we propose that reflective cognitive style is associated with a greater moral leniency—that is, a greater tendency to be tolerant of moral violations, and that moral leniency predicts utilitarian judgment when utilitarian judgment is measured through permissibility. In Study 1 (N = 192), we design a set of vignettes to assess moral leniency. In Studies 2 and 3 (N = 455, 428), we show that reflective cognitive style is indeed associated with greater moral leniency, and that moral leniency mediates the connection between cognitive style and utilitarian judgment. We discuss the implication of our results for the interpretation of the relationship between utilitarianism and reflective cognitive style.

Abstract Image

理性严谨但道德宽容:探索道德宽容作为认知风格与“功利”判断之间的中介
以往关于道德困境道德判断的研究揭示了功利判断与反思认知风格之间的联系。这在传统上被解释为反思有利于功利主义。然而,最近的研究表明,只有当参与者被问及功利主义选择是否被允许时,反思性认知风格和功利主义判断之间的联系才成立,而当他们被问及功利主义选择是否被推荐时,这种联系就消失了。为了解释这一现象,我们提出反思性认知风格与更大的道德宽容有关——也就是说,更倾向于容忍违反道德的行为,而道德宽容预示着功利主义判断,当功利主义判断是通过容忍度来衡量的。在研究1 (N = 192)中,我们设计了一组小插曲来评估道德宽容。在研究2和研究3中(N = 455,428),我们发现反映性认知风格确实与更大的道德宽容有关,而道德宽容在认知风格和功利判断之间起到中介作用。我们讨论了我们的结果对解释功利主义和反思性认知风格之间关系的意义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Cognitive Science
Cognitive Science PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL-
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
8.00%
发文量
139
期刊介绍: Cognitive Science publishes articles in all areas of cognitive science, covering such topics as knowledge representation, inference, memory processes, learning, problem solving, planning, perception, natural language understanding, connectionism, brain theory, motor control, intentional systems, and other areas of interdisciplinary concern. Highest priority is given to research reports that are specifically written for a multidisciplinary audience. The audience is primarily researchers in cognitive science and its associated fields, including anthropologists, education researchers, psychologists, philosophers, linguists, computer scientists, neuroscientists, and roboticists.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信