The Limits of the Primacy of Morality Hypothesis: Are Global Impressions of Experts Based Mainly on their Competence or Morality?

IF 1.6 4区 心理学 Q3 PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL
International Review of Social Psychology Pub Date : 2023-04-21 eCollection Date: 2023-01-01 DOI:10.5334/irsp.643
Katarzyna Stasiuk, Mariola Paruzel-Czachura, Romuald Polczyk, Józef Maciuszek
{"title":"The Limits of the Primacy of Morality Hypothesis: Are Global Impressions of Experts Based Mainly on their Competence or Morality?","authors":"Katarzyna Stasiuk, Mariola Paruzel-Czachura, Romuald Polczyk, Józef Maciuszek","doi":"10.5334/irsp.643","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>According to the primacy of morality hypothesis, moral traits are the most substantial contributor to - and when positive, always contribute positively to - global impressions of others. In three experiments (<i>N</i> = 413), we asked participants to form global impressions of the financial advisor (Study 1a), car mechanic (Study 1b), and physician (Study 1c). Contrary to the primacy of morality hypothesis, we showed that when people evaluate experts, they are guided primarily by experts' competence (solving or not solving clients' problems), not morality (moral or immoral intentions). The global impressions of the experts who made a mistake and did not solve clients' problems were negative regardless of the experts' moral or immoral intentions. However, the competent experts were continually assessed positively regardless of their good or bad intentions. The meta-analysis showed that the effect of manipulated intention on global impression was not significant. The results pose a challenge to the idea that moral behaviors are the most relevant when making global impressions of others.</p>","PeriodicalId":45461,"journal":{"name":"International Review of Social Psychology","volume":"1 1","pages":"4"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12372693/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Review of Social Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5334/irsp.643","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

According to the primacy of morality hypothesis, moral traits are the most substantial contributor to - and when positive, always contribute positively to - global impressions of others. In three experiments (N = 413), we asked participants to form global impressions of the financial advisor (Study 1a), car mechanic (Study 1b), and physician (Study 1c). Contrary to the primacy of morality hypothesis, we showed that when people evaluate experts, they are guided primarily by experts' competence (solving or not solving clients' problems), not morality (moral or immoral intentions). The global impressions of the experts who made a mistake and did not solve clients' problems were negative regardless of the experts' moral or immoral intentions. However, the competent experts were continually assessed positively regardless of their good or bad intentions. The meta-analysis showed that the effect of manipulated intention on global impression was not significant. The results pose a challenge to the idea that moral behaviors are the most relevant when making global impressions of others.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

道德至上假说的局限性:专家的全球印象主要基于他们的能力还是道德?
根据道德至上假说,道德特质是对他人的全球印象最重要的贡献者——如果是积极的,总是积极的。在三个实验(N = 413)中,我们要求参与者形成对财务顾问(研究1a)、汽车修理工(研究1b)和医生(研究1c)的整体印象。与道德至上假设相反,我们表明,当人们评估专家时,他们主要是由专家的能力(解决或不解决客户的问题)而不是道德(道德或不道德的意图)来指导的。无论专家的道德或不道德意图如何,犯了错误和没有解决客户问题的专家的整体印象都是负面的。然而,无论他们的意图是好是坏,有能力的专家都得到了积极的评价。meta分析显示,操纵意向对整体印象的影响不显著。这一结果对道德行为与他人的全球印象最相关的观点提出了挑战。
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
CiteScore
5.20
自引率
8.00%
发文量
7
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊介绍: The International Review of Social Psychology (IRSP) is supported by the Association pour la Diffusion de la Recherche Internationale en Psychologie Sociale (A.D.R.I.P.S.). The International Review of Social Psychology publishes empirical research and theoretical notes in all areas of social psychology. Articles are written preferably in English but can also be written in French. The journal was created to reflect research advances in a field where theoretical and fundamental questions inevitably convey social significance and implications. It emphasizes scientific quality of its publications in every area of social psychology. Any kind of research can be considered, as long as the results significantly enhance the understanding of a general social psychological phenomenon and the methodology is appropriate.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信