Norms and the Flexibility of Moral Action

FeldmanHall, Oriel; Son, Jae-Young; Heffner, Joseph

doi:10.1017/pen.2018.13

Cited by 24 publications

(27 citation statements)

References 242 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In contrast, when a choice is framed as merely "not helping others," that may be less likely to trigger the harm/care norm in people's minds. Overall, this study reveal that third-party punishment is vulnerable to decision frames, which may help understand the flexibility of moral standards and moral actions (FeldmanHall et al, 2018). More broadly speaking, the current findings enrich the knowledge about the psychological processes of moral judgment and their corresponding neural underpinnings (Kelly & O'Connell, 2020).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 54%

The sensitivity of third party punishment to the framing effect and its brain mechanism

Yang

Liu

et al. 2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

People as third-party observers, without direct self-interest, may punish norm violators to maintain social norms. However, third-party judgment and the follow-up punishment might be susceptible to the way we frame (i.e., verbally describe) a norm violation. We conducted a behavioral and a neuroimaging experiment to investigate the above phenomenon, which we call “third-party framing effect.” In these experiments, participants observed an anonymous player A decided whether to retain her/his economic benefit while exposing player B to a risk of physical pain (described as “harming others” in one condition and “not helping others” in the other condition), then they had a chance to punish player A at their own cost. Participants were more willing to execute third-party punishment under the harm frame compared to the help frame, manifesting as a framing effect. Self-reported moral outrage toward player A mediated the relationship between empathy toward player B and the framing effect size. Correspondingly, the insula (possibly related to empathy) and cerebellum (possibly related to anger) were activated more strongly under the harm frame than the help frame. Functional connectivity between these regions showed strongest weight when predicting the framing effect size. These findings shed light on the psychological and neural mechanisms of the third-party framing effect.Graphic abstract

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 54%

The sensitivity of third party punishment to the framing effect and its brain mechanism

Yang

Liu

et al. 2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…With a belief in a justworld, support for AFF is likely to increase. This finding could be situated within the viewpoint that a belief in a just-world is inclusive of a belief in the principle of reciprocity, such as "what goes around comes around" (FeldmanHall et al, 2018;Hafer, 2000;Lerner, 1980). This suggests that one might commit to favourable acts towards others in expectation of a reward.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 84%

“…This is supported by the evolutionary perspective which identifies "probability of reciprocation" as one of the conditions under which altruism evolved (Stevens & Duque, 2016). As such JWB would also include a belief that "if one does good then one deserves good" or "good things happen to good people and bad things to bad people" (FeldmanHall et al, 2018;Hafer, 2000;Lerner, 1980).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The worldviews of self-transcendence and just-world belief are of interest in this study because it is the perception of the authors that they have underlying similarities. This is so in that both worldviews assume a universal order that directs life events and the recognition that human actions are the channels through which life events are produced (FeldmanHall et al, 2018;Stroebe et al, 2015). As such, they are worldviews that prescribe consciousness of the consequences of one's actions on others.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Social worldviews and social attitudes: Examining the psychological correlates for other-concern

Olonisakin

Adebayo

Idemudia

2021

JCVE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Social inequality or inequity is existent in every society. As such, most societies dedicate efforts to ensuring fairness and justice for all its members. The university environment constitutes a miniature society on its own and everyday broader realities of the larger society are equally applicable within the university. The attitude that students hold with regards to social inequality could be a function of their worldviews which act as guiding principles for social conduct. In this study, the worldviews of self-transcendence and just-world beliefs were examined in relation to support for affirmative action and social dominance orientation among students. The study employed a survey approach with data collected through questionnaires from a sample of 331 (62.8% female) undergraduate students in a public university. The authors hypothesized that self-transcendence and just-world beliefs would be positively associated with support for affirmative action and negatively with social dominance orientation. Result of data analysis using structural equation modelling confirmed the hypotheses in this study. However, the relationship between just-world beliefs and social dominance orientation was not significant. Results were discussed for their implications for acceptance of social policies that try to bridge the gap between dominant and marginalised groups. The implication of findings for understanding and managing interaction between groups in an educational setting were emphasised. Recommendations were made regarding how policy makers can use knowledge of worldviews held by student in designing strategies geared towards acceptance of policies targeted at ensuring positive outcomes for members of disadvantaged groups. Suggestions for future research were given.

show abstract

“…The inclination to appear moral is driven by the social benefits that arise from complying with the social norm of reciprocity, which can consequently serve one's self-interest; as such, these benefits are processed and incorporated into one's behavior. On the bright side, however, considering the importance of reciprocity as a universal norm that promotes cooperation between individuals and groups (Axelrod, 1984;FeldmanHall et al, 2018;Nakashima et al, 2017;Rand & Nowak, 2013), as long as the information provided to both sides is equal, perhaps the true motivation underlying automatically driven reciprocal behavior is less important than the act itself.…”

Section: Self-serving Prosocialitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Is it all about appearance? Limited cognitive control and information advantage reveal self-serving reciprocity

Katzir¹,

Halali²

2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Previous research on social preferences has found that reciprocal behavior is an automatic response, which requires less cognitive control than self-interested behavior. However, research on unethicality has demonstrated that cognitive control is required to resist the temptation to benefit from engaging in an unethical act, thus suggesting that self-interested behaviors are automatic. By manipulating information asymmetry (i.e., advantage) among trust game receivers, we examined whether the automatic tendency to positively reciprocate a kind gesture is driven by a genuine motivation to be fair, or whether it reflects a motivation to appear fair. In an equal-information condition, we replicated previous findings by showing that limited cognitive control, due to ego-depletion, promotes reciprocal behavior (Experiments 1 & 2). However, this effect did not replicate under time-constraint, an additional manipulation to limit cognitive control (Experiment 3). Importantly, in an advantaged-information condition, under ego-depletion (Experiments 1 & 2) or time-constraint (Experiments 3 & 4) manipulation, participants did not exhibit enhanced reciprocity. Rather, in three out of these four experiments, and as confirmed by a meta-analysis that additionally included a pilot experiment, participants exploited their information advantage and positively reciprocated to a lesser extent than participants whose cognitive control was intact. These results suggest that the automatic preference for reciprocity might be more driven by a self-serving motivation to appear (rather than to be) fair than is typically credited. We further discuss various other findings supporting the notion that what may appear as automatic pro-sociality may in fact reflect an automatic self-serving motivation of self-presentation

show abstract

Norms and the Flexibility of Moral Action

Cited by 24 publications

References 242 publications

The sensitivity of third party punishment to the framing effect and its brain mechanism

The sensitivity of third party punishment to the framing effect and its brain mechanism

Social worldviews and social attitudes: Examining the psychological correlates for other-concern

Is it all about appearance? Limited cognitive control and information advantage reveal self-serving reciprocity

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About