Judging those who judge: Perceivers infer the roles of affect and cognition underpinning others' moral dilemma responses.
Whereas considerable research examines antecedents of moral dilemma judgments where causing harm maximizes outcomes, this work examines social consequences: whether participants infer personality characteristics from others' dilemma judgments. We propose that people infer the roles of affective and...
| Publicado en: | Journal of Experimental Social Psychology Vol. 69; pp. 44 - 59 |
|---|---|
| Autores principales: | , , |
| Formato: | Artículo |
| Publicado: |
Academic Press Inc.
Mar2017
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | Ver este registro en EBSCOhost |
| fields | @attributes: recordID: 1 pdfLink: plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ssf&AN=120474738&site=ehost-live header: @attributes: shortDbName: ssf uiTerm: 120474738 longDbName: Social Sciences Full Text (H.W. Wilson) uiTag: AN controlInfo: bkinfo: jinfo: jid: 00221031 JEZ jtl: Journal of Experimental Social Psychology issn: 00221031 maglogo: N pubinfo: dt: Mar2017 vid: 69 pid: 735 pub: Academic Press Inc. artinfo: ui: 120474738 10.1016/j.jesp.2016.09.007 ppf: 44 ppct: 15 formats: tig: atl: Judging those who judge: Perceivers infer the roles of affect and cognition underpinning others' moral dilemma responses. aug: au: Rom, Sarah C. Weiss, Alexa Conway, Paul affil: Social Cognition Center Cologne, University of Cologne, Germany Department of Psychology, Florida State University & Social Cognition Center Cologne, University of Cologne, Germany su: Affect (Psychology) Cognition Judgment (Psychology) Social impact Cognitive ability Ethical problems sug: subj: Affect (Psychology) Cognition Judgment (Psychology) Social impact Cognitive ability Ethical problems keyword: Affect and cognition Lay theories Meta-perceptions Moral dilemmas Social perception Affect and cognition Lay theories Meta-perceptions Moral dilemmas Social perception ab: Whereas considerable research examines antecedents of moral dilemma judgments where causing harm maximizes outcomes, this work examines social consequences: whether participants infer personality characteristics from others' dilemma judgments. We propose that people infer the roles of affective and cognitive processing underlying other peoples' moral dilemma judgments, and use this information to inform personality perceptions. In Studies 1 and 2, participants rated targets who rejected causing outcome-maximizing harm (consistent with deontology) as warmer but less competent than targets who accepted causing outcome-maximizing harm (consistent with utilitarianism). Studies 3a and 3b replicated this pattern and demonstrated that perceptions of affective processing mediated the effect on warmth, whereas perceptions of cognitive processing mediated the effect on competence. In Study 4 participants accurately predicted that affective decision-makers would reject harm, whereas cognitive decision-makers would accept harm. Furthermore, participants preferred targets who rejected causing harm for a social role prioritizing warmth (pediatrician), whereas they preferred targets who accepted causing harm for a social role prioritizing competence (hospital management, Study 5). Together, these results suggest that people infer the role of affective and cognitive processing underlying others' harm rejection and acceptance judgments, which inform personality inferences and decision-making. pubtype: Academic Journal doctype: Article src: R language: English refInfo: copyright: @attributes: flag: N holdings: @attributes: islocal: N |
|---|