Contributions and challenges of cultural research on the development of social cognition

Miller, Joan G.; Wice, Matthew; Goyal, Namrata

doi:10.1016/j.dr.2018.03.003

Cited by 16 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 49 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This finding is especially important for cross-cultural psychologists. Miller et al, in fact, have called attention to a need for psychological theories that are as sensitive to culturally variant dynamics as they are to culturally invariant ones (Miller, Goyal, & Wice, 2017; Miller, Wice, & Goyal, 2018). Our findings showed that Turkish participants based their moral judgments primarily on the principle of unity, whereas American participants generally employed the principle of equality (see Study 2), which resembles Miller and Bersoff’s (1992) cross-cultural conceptualization of morality as interpersonal morality and justice.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Beyond harmfulness and impurity: Moral wrongness as a violation of relational motivations.

Tepe

Aydınlı-Karakulak

2019

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Building on Rai and Fiske’s (2011) Relationship Regulation Theory, we argue that violation of relational motives will predict the perception of the moral wrongness of moral transgressions better than violation of harmlessness or purity. We also argue that “metarelational threat” plays an important role in determining the degree of moral wrongness of a particular act. To test our propositions, we conducted 6 studies, 3 with Turkish and American respondents. Scenarios where a relational component was present were perceived as more morally relevant (Study 1, N = 199). We found that relational motive violations predicted perceived moral wrongness better than violations of harmlessness or purity (Study 2, N = 261) and that metarelational threat partially mediated this relationship (Study 3, N = 357). Turkish participants generally based their judgments on the principle of unity, whereas the Americans tended to base theirs on the principle of equality. Study 4 (N = 138) confirmed the key findings and indicated that harmfulness was not related to moral wrongness when relational motive violation was low, but it did predict perceptions of moral wrongness when relational motivation was high. Study 5 (N = 152), by contrast, showed that harmfulness and impurity were superior to violations of relational motives in predicting the perceived moral wrongness of severe harmful and impure behaviors. Study 6 (N = 134) addressed this inconsistency and confirmed that relational motivations matter for perceptions of moral wrongness. Implications of the current research for understanding morality are discussed, and avenues for future research are recommended.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Beyond harmfulness and impurity: Moral wrongness as a violation of relational motivations.

Tepe

Aydınlı-Karakulak

2019

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The specific question in each case was, “ Do you think it is morally right to use violence to/in … .” The researcher asked follow up questions to determine whether an affirmative answer referred to social conformity or the social convention domain (“it is right because everyone does it”) or if it referred to moral violence (“it is right to use violence in this situation”). This differentiation is critical to differentiate external motivation from internalized moral standards (Miller et al, 2011, 2018). Only the latter were considered affirmative moral violence responses.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Is violence ever right? Moral reasoning about violence among youngsters belonging to gangs and peacebuilding groups.

Sanguineti¹,

Jovchelovitch²

2021

Psychology of Violence

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: We investigate cultural group-level understandings of violence and their connections to individual moral reasoning about violence among disadvantaged young people belonging to gangs (n=33) and peacebuilding (n=30) groups. Methods: Drawing from in-depth interviews in two low-income neighborhoods in Colombia, we use thematic analysis to explore and compare group-level understandings of violence-entailing definitions of violence, causal attributions of violence, and strategies to handle violence in everyday life-by type of youth group. Next, we use a chi-square analysis to assess between-group differences in the proportion of participants endorsing the morality of violence according to eight potential moral violence triggers. Results: Youths from both types of groups define violence in similar terms with one key difference. Only gang members ascribe agency to "the group" (i.e., the gang, the family) describing it as a social entity capable of harming and being harmed. This taken-for-granted cultural assumption frames the gang members' justifications of violence as moral to defend one's group. Concurrently, a higher proportion of youths from violent groups support the morality of violence to defend one's reputation (p=.001), honor (p<.001), and group (p=.001). Conclusions: Between-group differences in shared understandings of violence are consistent with differences in individual moral reasoning about violence across group type. The findings have implications for improving the efficacy of violence prevention interventions, which rarely account for the link between young people's shared understandings of violence and moral reasoning about its use.

show abstract

“…Relationship-maintenance motivation of participants during research interviews and FGDs challenge the assumption that participants’ inner states or true beliefs are captured in the research process. There is overwhelming evidence that people make sense of situations by drawing upon their belonging and relationships to act in ways that are considerate of the needs, views, and perspectives of others (Font et al, 2016; Jaghoory et al, 2018; Miller et al, 2018; Mugadza et al, 2019; Oyserman, 2017; Pfundmair et al, 2015; Thomas et al, 2016). In many instances cultural norms and obligations to the collective determine what is revealed to people who do not belong to the community.…”

Section: Interrogating a Priori Commitments Of Paradigmatic Versions ...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Interrogating paradigmatic commitments of focus group methodology: An invitation to context-sensitive qualitative research methods.

Chauhan¹,

Sehgal²

2022

Qualitative Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Contributions and challenges of cultural research on the development of social cognition

Cited by 16 publications

References 49 publications

Beyond harmfulness and impurity: Moral wrongness as a violation of relational motivations.

Beyond harmfulness and impurity: Moral wrongness as a violation of relational motivations.

Is violence ever right? Moral reasoning about violence among youngsters belonging to gangs and peacebuilding groups.

Interrogating paradigmatic commitments of focus group methodology: An invitation to context-sensitive qualitative research methods.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About