Have a personal or library account? Click to login
Wrongness and Blame Judgments and Their Dynamics: Toward a Three-Input Processing Model of Moral Judgment Cover

Wrongness and Blame Judgments and Their Dynamics: Toward a Three-Input Processing Model of Moral Judgment

Open Access
|Nov 2024

References

  1. 1Bates, D., Mächler, M., Bolker, B., & Walker, S. (2015). Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software, 67(1), 148. 10.18637/jss.v067.i01
  2. 2Cushman, F. (2008). Crime and punishment: Distinguishing the roles of causal and intentional analyses in moral judgment. Cognition, 108(2), 353380. 10.1016/j.cognition.2008.03.006
  3. 3Cushman, F., Sheketoff, R., Wharton, S., & Carey, S. (2013). The development of intent-based moral judgment. Cognition, 127(1), 621. 10.1016/j.cognition.2012.11.008
  4. 4Freeman, J. B., & Ambady, N. (2010). MouseTracker: Software for studying real-time mental processing using a computer mouse-tracking method. Behavior Research Methods, 42(1), 226241. 10.3758/BRM.42.1.226
  5. 5Freeman, J. B., Dale, R., & Farmer, T. A. (2011). Hand in motion reveals mind in motion. Frontiers in Psychology, 2(59), 16. 10.3389/fpsyg.2011.00059
  6. 6Gaboriaud, A., Gautheron, F., Quinton, J.-C., & Smeding, A. (2022). The effects of intent, outcome, and causality on moral judgments and decision processes. Psychologica Belgica, 62(1), 218229. 10.5334/pb.1157
  7. 7Gautheron, F., Quinton, J.-C., Muller, D., & Smeding, A. (2023). Paradigm constraints on moral decision-making dynamics. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, e2324. 10.1002/bdm.2324
  8. 8Gawronski, B., & Beer, J. S. (2017). What makes moral dilemma judgments ‘utilitarian’ or ‘deontological’? Social Neuroscience, 12(6), 626632. 10.1080/17470919.2016.1248787
  9. 9Graham, J., Nosek, B. A., Haidt, J., Iyer, R., Koleva, S., & Ditto, P. H. (2011). Mapping the moral domain. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 101(2), 366385. 10.1037/a0021847
  10. 10Gray, K., & Graham, J. (Eds.) (2018). Atlas of moral psychology. The Guilford Press.
  11. 11Hehman, E., Stolier, R. M., & Freeman, J. B. (2015). Advanced mouse-tracking analytic techniques for enhancing psychological science. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 18(3), 384401. 10.1177/1368430214538325
  12. 12Hofmann, W., & Grigoryan, L. (2023). The social psychology of everyday life. In Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 68, 77137. 10.1016/bs.aesp.2023.06.001
  13. 13Judd, C. M., Westfall, J., & Kenny, D. A. (2012). Treating stimuli as a random factor in social psychology: A new and comprehensive solution to a pervasive but largely ignored problem. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 103(1), 5469. 10.1037/a0028347
  14. 14Kneer, M., & Machery, E. (2019). No luck for moral luck. Cognition, 182, 331348. 10.1016/j.cognition.2018.09.003
  15. 15Kneer, M., & Skoczeń, I. (2023). Outcome effects, moral luck and the hindsight bias. Cognition, 232, 105258. 10.1016/j.cognition.2022.105258
  16. 16Koop, G. J. (2013). An assessment of the temporal dynamics of moral decisions. Judgment and Decision Making, 8(5), 527539. 10.1017/S1930297500003636
  17. 17Lakens, D. (2014). Performing high-powered studies efficiently with sequential analyses. European Journal of Social Psychology, 44, 701710. 10.1002/ejsp.2023
  18. 18Leloup, L., Meert, G., & Samson, D. (2018). Moral judgments depend on information presentation: Evidence for recency and transfer effects. Psychologica Belgica, 58(1), 256. 10.5334/pb.421
  19. 19Malle, B. F. (2021). Moral judgments. Annual Review of Psychology, 72(1), 293318. 10.1146/annurev-psych-072220-104358
  20. 20Malle, B. F., Guglielmo, S., & Monroe, A. E. (2014). A theory of blame. Psychological Inquiry, 25(2), 147186. 10.1080/1047840X.2014.877340
  21. 21Nobes, G., Panagiotaki, G., & Engelhardt, P. E. (2017). The development of intention-based morality: The influence of intention salience and recency, negligence, and outcome on children’s and adults’ judgments. Developmental Psychology, 53, 18951911. 10.1037/dev0000380
  22. 22Samson, D., & Leloup, L. (2018). Moral scenarios manipulating the intention to harm, the outcome of the action and the order of the intention/outcome information – Set 2 (Version 1). figshare. 10.6084/m9.figshare.5117107.v1
  23. 23Sinnott-Armstrong, W. (2018). Asking the right questions in moral psychology. In K. Gray & J. Graham (Eds.), Atlas of moral psychology (pp. 565571). The Guilford Press.
  24. 24Smeding, A., Quinton, J.-C., Lauer, K., Barca, L., & Pezzulo, G. (2016). Tracking and simulating dynamics of implicit stereotypes: A situated social cognition perspective. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 111(6), 817834. 10.1037/pspa0000063
  25. 25Westfall, J. (2016). Running head: PANGEA: Power ANalysis for GEneral Anova designs. https://jakewestfall.shinyapps.io/pangea/
  26. 26Westfall, J., Kenny, D. A., & Judd, C. M. (2014). Statistical power and optimal design in experiments in which samples of participants respond to samples of stimuli. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 143(5), 20202045. 10.1037/xge0000014
  27. 27Young, L., Cushman, F., Hauser, M., & Saxe, R. (2007). The neural basis of the interaction between theory of mind and moral judgment. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 104(20), 82358240. 10.1073/pnas.0701408104
  28. 28Young, L., & Tsoi, L. (2013). When mental states matter, when they don’t, and what that means for morality: When mental states matter for morality. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 7(8), 585604. 10.1111/spc3.12044
DOI: https://doi.org/10.5334/irsp.868 | Journal eISSN: 2397-8570
Language: English
Submitted on: Sep 8, 2023
Accepted on: Oct 9, 2024
Published on: Nov 11, 2024
Published by: Ubiquity Press
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Publication frequency: 1 issue per year

© 2024 Aurore Gaboriaud, Flora Gautheron, Jean-Charles Quinton, Annique Smeding, published by Ubiquity Press
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.