__smbhome.uscs.susx.ac.uk_ellenaj_Desktop_SRO_after august_Farsides Sparks and Jessop (2017) Self-reported reasons for moral decisions SRO version.pdf (389.55 kB)
Self-reported reasons for moral decisions
journal contribution
posted on 2023-06-09, 08:31 authored by Tom FarsidesTom Farsides, Paul Sparks, Donna JessopDonna JessopMany investigations of moral decision-making employ hypothetical scenarios in which each participant has to choose between two options. One option is usually deemed “utilitarian” and the other either “non-utilitarian” or “deontological”. Very little has been done to establish the validity of such measures. It is unclear what they measure, let alone how well they do so. In this exploratory study, participants were asked about the reasons for their decisions in six hypothetical scenarios. Various concerns contributed to each decision. Action decisions occurred when utilitarian concerns dominated. Bystanding decisions resulted from different concerns or combinations of concerns dominating in different situations, with utilitarianism usually among participants’ concerns. None of the labels usually used for either decision therefore seems entirely appropriate. Five concerns were identified as necessary and sufficient to predict over 85% of participants’ decisions. This suggests great promise for future research, particularly in investigation of real-world moral decisions.
History
Publication status
- Published
File Version
- Accepted version
Journal
Thinking and ReasoningISSN
1354-6783Publisher
Taylor and FrancisExternal DOI
Issue
1Volume
24Page range
1-20Department affiliated with
- Psychology Publications
Full text available
- Yes
Peer reviewed?
- Yes
Legacy Posted Date
2017-10-31First Open Access (FOA) Date
2018-09-13First Compliant Deposit (FCD) Date
2017-10-31Usage metrics
Categories
No categories selectedLicence
Exports
RefWorks
BibTeX
Ref. manager
Endnote
DataCite
NLM
DC