It’s not right but it’s permitted: Wording effects in moral judgement

Barbosa de la Torre, Sergio; Jimmenez Leal, William

Ítem

Acceso Abierto

It’s not right but it’s permitted: Wording effects in moral judgement

Mostrar el registro sencillo de la publicación

dc.creator	Barbosa de la Torre, Sergio
dc.creator	Jimmenez Leal, William	spa
dc.date.accessioned	2020-08-19T14:44:35Z
dc.date.available	2020-08-19T14:44:35Z
dc.date.created	2017	spa
dc.description.abstract	This study aims to provide evidence about two widely held assumptions in the experimental study of moral judgment. First, that different terms used to ask for moral judgment (e.g., blame, wrongness, permissibility. . . ) can be treated as synonyms and hence used interchangeably. Second, that the moral and legal status of the judged action are independent of one another and thus moral judgment have no influence of legal or other conventional considerations. Previous research shows mixed results on these claims. We recruited 660 participants who provided moral judgment to three identical sacrificial dilemmas using seven different terms. We experimentally manipulated the explicit legal status of the judged action. Results suggest that terms that highlight the utilitarian nature of the judged action cause harsher moral judgments as a mechanism of reputation preservation. Also, the manipulation of the legal status of the judged action holds for all considered terms but is larger for impermissibility judgments. Taken as a whole, our results imply that, although subtle, different terms used to ask for moral judgment have theoretically and methodologically relevant differences which calls for further scrutiny.	eng
dc.format.mimetype	application/pdf
dc.identifier.issn	EISSN: 1930-2975
dc.identifier.uri	https://repository.urosario.edu.co/handle/10336/27911
dc.language.iso	eng	spa
dc.publisher	Society for Judgment and Decision Making	spa
dc.relation.citationEndPage	223
dc.relation.citationIssue	No. 3
dc.relation.citationStartPage	208
dc.relation.citationTitle	Judgment and Decision Making
dc.relation.citationVolume	Vol. 12
dc.relation.ispartof	Judgment and Decision Making, EISSN: 1930-2975, Vol.12, No.3 (May 2017); pp. 208–223	spa
dc.relation.uri	https://www.researchgate.net/profile/William_Jimenez_Leal/publication/317769023_It's_not_right_but_it's_permitted_Wording_effects_in_moral_judgement/links/5d95ff1792851c2f70e801d2/Its-not-right-but-its-permitted-Wording-effects-in-moral-judgement.pdf	spa
dc.rights.accesRights	info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
dc.rights.acceso	Abierto (Texto Completo)	spa
dc.source	Judgment and Decision Making	spa
dc.source.instname	instname:Universidad del Rosario
dc.source.reponame	reponame:Repositorio Institucional EdocUR
dc.subject.keyword	Moral judgment	spa
dc.subject.keyword	Wording effects	spa
dc.subject.keyword	Social conventions	spa
dc.subject.keyword	Law	spa
dc.title	It’s not right but it’s permitted: Wording effects in moral judgement	spa
dc.title.TranslatedTitle	No es correcto, pero está permitido: efectos de redacción en el juicio moral	spa
dc.type	article	eng
dc.type.hasVersion	info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
dc.type.spa	Artículo	spa