Topic
Morality
About: Morality is a research topic. Over the lifetime, 22623 publications have been published within this topic receiving 545733 citations. The topic is also known as: moral & morals.
Papers published on a yearly basis
Papers
More filters
TL;DR: In this article, a new index, N2, was proposed for the Defining Issues Test (DIT), which is based on the P index and has been used for over 20 years.
Abstract: For over 20 years, the Defining Issues Test (DIT) has used the P index. In view of criticisms, a search has been underway for a new index. The authors propose a working definition of construct validity, systematically reanalyze existing data sets ("classic" studies) with new indexes, and make comparisons to trends obtained using the P index. The criteria for construct validity are (a) sensitivity to educational interventions, (b) differentiation of age-education al groups, (c) upward movement in longitudinal studies, (d) correlations with moral comprehension, (e) correlations with prosocial behavior, and (f) correlations with civil libertarian attitudes. As meta-analysis demonstrates, a new index, N2, generally outperforms the P index. In the early 1970s, Larry Kohlberg found amusement by comparing the research project on the Defining Issues Test (DIT) to alchemy. The alchemist's dream of the middle ages had been to transmute the "base metals" into gold. At the time, Kohlberg was beginning work on revising his scoring system and was mindful of the complexities involved in analyzing moral judgments and the arduous work required of a scorer. Kohlberg pointed out similarities between alchemy and the attempt to derive a measure of moral judgment from a multiple-choic e test. Obtaining moral development scores by simply asking participants to rate or rank statements seemed too good to be true—it was like trying to turn lead into gold. Nevertheless he was supportive of the exploration of new sources of information on moral judgment (Kohlberg, 1979), although he did make sure that we were alert to the possible problems with such an approach. Years later, once we had developed computer programs to score the DIT, we joked with Kohlberg about doing morality research "untouched by human hands'1—the very thought of which he also found preposterously amusing. For over 20 years, DIT researchers have relied on the P score to index moral judgment and for that long we have tried to find a better index. Not only did we aspire to find a
221 citations
TL;DR: It is argued that although there is a relationship between morality and empathy, it is not as straightforward as apparent at first glance and it is critical to distinguish among the different facets of empathy, as each uniquely influences moral cognition and predicts differential outcomes in moral behavior.
Abstract: In the past decade, a flurry of empirical and theoretical research on morality and empathy has taken place, and interest and usage in the media and the public arena have increased. At times, in both popular culture and academia, morality and empathy are used interchangeably, and quite often the latter is considered to play a foundational role for the former. In this article, we argue that although there is a relationship between morality and empathy, it is not as straightforward as apparent at first glance. Moreover, it is critical to distinguish among the different facets of empathy (emotional sharing, empathic concern, and perspective taking), as each uniquely influences moral cognition and predicts differential outcomes in moral behavior. Empirical evidence and theories from evolutionary biology as well as developmental, behavioral, and affective and social neuroscience are comprehensively integrated in support of this argument. The wealth of findings illustrates a complex and equivocal relationship between morality and empathy. The key to understanding such relations is to be more precise on the concepts being used and, perhaps, abandoning the muddy concept of empathy.
221 citations
TL;DR: For example, this article found that uncertainty leads people to make inferences about the plausibility or implausibility of conspiracy theories by attending to morality information, particularly when people experience uncertainty.
Abstract: Inthe presentresearch,weexaminedpeople’s tendencytoendorseorquestion beliefinconspiracy theories.Intwo studies,wetested the hypothesis that the perceived morality of authorities influences conspiracy beliefs, particularly when people experience uncertainty. Study 1 revealed that information about the morality of oil companies influenced beliefs that these companies were involved in planning the war in Iraq, but only when uncertainty was made salient. Similar findings were obtained in Study 2, which focused on a bogus newspaper article about a fatal car accident of a political leader in an African country. It is concluded that uncertainty leads people to make inferences about the plausibility or implausibility of conspiracy theories by attending to morality information. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. In contemporary society, people are frequently faced with events that threaten the social order, such as terrorist attacks, wars, and economic crises. These events sometimes give rise to conspiracy theories, which can be defined as explanatory beliefs that involve a number of actors who join together in secret agreement, and try to achieve a hidden goal that is perceived as unlawful or malevolent (Zonis & Joseph, 1994; p. 448–449). These conspiring actors typically pertain to legitimate power holders or insti
220 citations
Book•
01 Jan 1988
TL;DR: In this article, the authors discuss the authority of the moral agent and the need for common-sense morality to be self-defeating, arguing that common sense morality is selfdefeating.
Abstract: Introduction. 1. John Rawls: Classical Utilitarianism 2. Bernard Williams: Consequentialism and Integrity 3. Thomas Nagel: War and Massacre 4. T.M. Scanlon: Rights, Goals, and Fairness 5. Peter Railton: Alienation, Consequentialism, and the Demands of Morality 6. Robert Nozick: Side Constraints 7. Thomas Nagel: Autonomy and Deontology 8. Derek Parfit: Is Common-Sense Morality Self-Defeating? 9. Amartya Sen: Rights and Agency 10. Philippa Foot: Utilitarianism and the Virtues 11. Samuel Scheffler: Agent-Centred Restrictions, Rationality, and the Virtues 12. Conrad D. Johnson: The Authority of the Moral Agent.
220 citations
Book•
[...]
01 Jan 2003
TL;DR: Risk and Morality examines how decisions about risk and uncertainty relate to moral principles and ethical conduct as discussed by the authors, and argues that new regimes for risk management are transforming social integration, value-based reasoning and morality.
Abstract: Risk and Morality examines how decisions about risk and uncertainty relate to moral principles and ethical conduct. Editors Richard Ericson and Aaron Doyle have brought together in this volume a selection of original essays on the topic by renowned scholars in the disciplines of philosophy, sociology, law, political science, geography, criminology, and accounting from Canada, the United States, England, France, and Australia. Presenting cutting-edge theory and research, the essays analyse the broader social, political, economic and cultural dimensions of risk and morality. The concept of risk has become pervasive in recent years in political discourse, popular culture, organizational communications, and everyday life. The contributors' respective research projects on risk and morality in politics, business, legal regulation, crime prevention, insurance, extreme sports, and biotechnology provide original empirical evidence to substantiate their theories and address the ideological and policy relevance of their work. Collectively, the contributors explain why risk is such a key aspect of Western culture, and demonstrate that new regimes for risk management are transforming social integration, value-based reasoning and morality. Further, they illustrate that these new regimes do not necessarily foster more responsible conduct or greater accountability in institutions.
219 citations