Attenzione: i dati modificati non sono ancora stati salvati. Per confermare inserimenti o cancellazioni di voci è necessario confermare con il tasto SALVA/INSERISCI in fondo alla pagina
Archivio istituzionale della ricerca dell'Università degli Studi di Palermo
The study of moral judgements often centres on moral dilemmas in which options consistent with deontological perspectives (that is, emphasizing rules, individual rights and duties) are in conflict with options consistent with utilitarian judgements (that is, following the greater good based on consequences). Greene et al. (2009) showed that psychological and situational factors (for example, the intent of the agent or the presence of physical contact between the agent and the victim) can play an important role in moral dilemma judgements (for example, the trolley problem). Our knowledge is limited concerning both the universality of these effects outside the United States and the impact of culture on the situational and psychological factors affecting moral judgements. Thus, we empirically tested the universality of the effects of intent and personal force on moral dilemma judgements by replicating the experiments of Greene et al. in 45 countries from all inhabited continents. We found that personal force and its interaction with intention exert influence on moral judgements in the US and Western cultural clusters, replicating and expanding the original findings. Moreover, the personal force effect was present in all cultural clusters, suggesting it is culturally universal. The evidence for the cultural universality of the interaction effect was inconclusive in the Eastern and Southern cultural clusters (depending on exclusion criteria). We found no strong association between collectivism/ individualism and moral dilemma judgements.
Bence Bago, M.K. (2022). Situational factors shape moral judgements in the trolley dilemma in Eastern, Southern and Western countries in a culturally diverse sample. NATURE HUMAN BEHAVIOUR [10.1038/s41562-022-01319-5].
Situational factors shape moral judgements in the trolley dilemma in Eastern, Southern and Western countries in a culturally diverse sample
Bence Bago
;Marton Kovacs;John Protzko;Tamas Nagy;Zoltan Kekecs;Bence Palfi;Matus Adamkovic;Sylwia Adamus;Sumaya Albalooshi;Nihan Albayrak-Aydemir;Ilham N. Alfian;Sinan Alper;Sara Alvarez-Solas;Sara G. Alves;Santiago Amaya;Pia K. Andresen;Gulnaz Anjum;Daniel Ansari;Patrícia Arriaga;John Jamir Benzon R. Aruta;Alexios Arvanitis;Peter Babincak;Krystian Barzykowski;Bana Bashour;Ernest Baskin;Luisa Batalha;Carlota Batres;Jozef Bavolar;Fatih Bayrak;Benjamin Becker;Maja Becker;Anabel Belaus;Michał Białek;Ennio Bilancini;Daniel Boller;Leonardo Boncinelli;Jordane Boudesseul;Benjamin T. Brown;Erin M. Buchanan;Muhammad M. Butt;Dustin P. Calvillo;Nate C. Carnes;Jared B. Celniker;Christopher R. Chartier;William J. Chopik;Poom Chotikavan;Hu Chuan-Peng;Rockwell F. Clancy;Ogeday Çoker;Rita C. Correia;Vera Cubela Adoric;Carmelo P. Cubillas;Stefan Czoschke;Yalda Daryani;Job A. M. de Grefte;Wieteke C. de Vries;Elif G. Demirag Burak;Carina Dias;Barnaby J. W. Dixson;Xinkai Du;Francesca Dumančić;Andrei Dumbravă;Natalia B. Dutra;Janina Enachescu;Celia Esteban-Serna;Luis Eudave;Thomas R. Evans;Gilad Feldman;Fatima M. Felisberti;Susann Fiedler;Andrej Findor;Alexandra Fleischmann;Francesco Foroni;Radka Francová;Darius-Aurel Frank;Cynthia H. Y. Fu;Shan Gao;Omid Ghasemi;Ali-Reza Ghazi-Noori;Maliki E. Ghossainy;Isabella Giammusso;Tripat Gill;Biljana Gjoneska;Mario Gollwitzer;Aurélien Graton;Maurice Grinberg;Agata Groyecka-Bernard;Elizabeth A. Harris;Andree Hartanto;Widad A. N. M. Hassan;Javad Hatami;Katrina R. Heimark;Jasper J. J. Hidding;Evgeniya Hristova;Matej Hruška;Charlotte A. Hudson;Richard Huskey;Ayumi Ikeda;Yoel Inbar;Gordon P. D. Ingram;Ozan Isler;Chris Isloi;Aishwarya Iyer;Bastian Jaeger;Steve M. J. Janssen;William Jiménez-Leal;Biljana Jokić;Pavol Kačmár;Veselina Kadreva;Gwenaël Kaminski;Farzan Karimi-Malekabadi;Arno T. A. Kasper;Keith M. Kendrick;Bradley J. Kennedy;Halil E. Kocalar;Rabia I. Kodapanakkal;Marta Kowal;Elliott Kruse;Lenka Kučerová;Anton Kühberger;Anna O. Kuzminska;Fanny Lalot;Claus Lamm;Joris Lammers;Elke B. Lange;Anthony Lantian;Ivy Y. -M. Lau;Ljiljana B. Lazarevic;Marijke C. Leliveld;Jennifer N. Lenz;Carmel A. Levitan;Savannah C. Lewis;Manyu Li;Yansong Li;Haozheng Li;Tiago J. S. Lima;Samuel Lins;Marco Tullio Liuzza;Paula Lopes;Jackson G. Lu;Trent Lynds;Martin Máčel;Sean P. Mackinnon;Madhavilatha Maganti;Zoe Magraw-Mickelson;Leon F. Magson;Harry Manley;Gabriela M. Marcu;Darja Masli Seršić;Celine-Justine Matibag;Alan D. A. Mattiassi;Mahdi Mazidi;Joseph P. McFall;Neil McLatchie;Michael C. Mensink;Lena Miketta;Taciano L. Milfont;Alberto Mirisola;Michal Misiak;Panagiotis Mitkidis;Mehrad Moeini-Jazani;Arash Monajem;David Moreau;Erica D. Musser;Erita Narhetali;Danielle P. Ochoa;Jerome Olsen;Nicholas C. Owsley;Asil A. Özdoğru;Miriam Panning;Marietta Papadatou-Pastou;Neha Parashar;Philip Pärnamets;Mariola Paruzel-Czachura;Michal Parzuchowski;Julia V. Paterlini;Jeffrey M. Pavlacic;Mehmet Peker;Kim Peters;Liudmila Piatnitckaia;Isabel Pinto;Monica Renee Policarpio;Nada Pop-Jordanova;Annas J. Pratama;Maximilian A. Primbs;Ekaterina Pronizius;Danka Purić;Elisa Puvia;Vahid Qamari;Kun Qian;Alain Quiamzade;Beáta Ráczová;Diego A. Reinero;Ulf-Dietrich Reips;Cecilia Reyna;Kimberly Reynolds;Matheus F. F. Ribeiro;Jan P. Röer;Robert M. Ross;Petros Roussos;Fernando Ruiz-Dodobara;Susana Ruiz-Fernandez;Bastiaan T. Rutjens;Katarzyna Rybus;Adil Samekin;Anabela C. Santos;Nicolas Say;Christoph Schild;Kathleen Schmidt;Karolina A. Ścigała;MohammadHasan Sharifian;Jiaxin Shi;Yaoxi Shi;Erin Sievers;Miroslav Sirota;Michael Slipenkyj;Çağlar Solak;Agnieszka Sorokowska;Piotr Sorokowski;Sinem Söylemez;Niklas K. Steffens;Ian D. Stephen;Anni Sternisko;Laura Stevens-Wilson;Suzanne L. K. Stewart;Stefan Stieger;Daniel Storage;Justine Strube;Kyle J. Susa;Raluca D. Szekely-Copîndean;Natalia M. Szostak;Bagus Takwin;Srinivasan Tatachari;Andrew G. Thomas;Kevin E. Tiede;Lucas E. Tiong;Mirjana Tonković;Bastien Trémolière;Lauren V. Tunstead;Belgüzar N. Türkan;Mathias Twardawski;Miguel A. Vadillo;Zahir Vally;Leigh Ann Vaughn;Bruno Verschuere;Denis Vlašiček;Martin Voracek;Marek A. Vranka;Shuzhen Wang;Skye-Loren West;Stephen Whyte;Leigh S. Wilton;Anna Wlodarczyk;Xue Wu;Fei Xin;Su Yadanar;Hiroshi Yama;Yuki Yamada;Onurcan Yilmaz;Sangsuk Yoon;Danielle M. Young;Ilya Zakharov;Rizqy A. Zein;Ingo Zettler;Iris L. Žeželj;Don C. Zhang;Jin Zhang;Xiaoxiao Zheng;194;Rink Hoekstra and Balazs Aczel
2022-04-14
Abstract
The study of moral judgements often centres on moral dilemmas in which options consistent with deontological perspectives (that is, emphasizing rules, individual rights and duties) are in conflict with options consistent with utilitarian judgements (that is, following the greater good based on consequences). Greene et al. (2009) showed that psychological and situational factors (for example, the intent of the agent or the presence of physical contact between the agent and the victim) can play an important role in moral dilemma judgements (for example, the trolley problem). Our knowledge is limited concerning both the universality of these effects outside the United States and the impact of culture on the situational and psychological factors affecting moral judgements. Thus, we empirically tested the universality of the effects of intent and personal force on moral dilemma judgements by replicating the experiments of Greene et al. in 45 countries from all inhabited continents. We found that personal force and its interaction with intention exert influence on moral judgements in the US and Western cultural clusters, replicating and expanding the original findings. Moreover, the personal force effect was present in all cultural clusters, suggesting it is culturally universal. The evidence for the cultural universality of the interaction effect was inconclusive in the Eastern and Southern cultural clusters (depending on exclusion criteria). We found no strong association between collectivism/ individualism and moral dilemma judgements.
Bence Bago, M.K. (2022). Situational factors shape moral judgements in the trolley dilemma in Eastern, Southern and Western countries in a culturally diverse sample. NATURE HUMAN BEHAVIOUR [10.1038/s41562-022-01319-5].
I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/10447/549045
Citazioni
7
30
28
social impact
Conferma cancellazione
Sei sicuro che questo prodotto debba essere cancellato?
simulazione ASN
Il report seguente simula gli indicatori relativi alla propria produzione scientifica in relazione alle soglie ASN 2023-2025 del proprio SC/SSD. Si ricorda che il superamento dei valori soglia (almeno 2 su 3) è requisito necessario ma non sufficiente al conseguimento dell'abilitazione. La simulazione si basa sui dati IRIS e sugli indicatori bibliometrici alla data indicata e non tiene conto di eventuali periodi di congedo obbligatorio, che in sede di domanda ASN danno diritto a incrementi percentuali dei valori. La simulazione può differire dall'esito di un’eventuale domanda ASN sia per errori di catalogazione e/o dati mancanti in IRIS, sia per la variabilità dei dati bibliometrici nel tempo. Si consideri che Anvur calcola i valori degli indicatori all'ultima data utile per la presentazione delle domande.
La presente simulazione è stata realizzata sulla base delle specifiche raccolte sul tavolo ER del Focus Group IRIS coordinato dall’Università di Modena e Reggio Emilia e delle regole riportate nel DM 589/2018 e allegata Tabella A. Cineca, l’Università di Modena e Reggio Emilia e il Focus Group IRIS non si assumono alcuna responsabilità in merito all’uso che il diretto interessato o terzi faranno della simulazione. Si specifica inoltre che la simulazione contiene calcoli effettuati con dati e algoritmi di pubblico dominio e deve quindi essere considerata come un mero ausilio al calcolo svolgibile manualmente o con strumenti equivalenti.