Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorOSMAN, Men_US
dc.contributor.authorOsman, Men_US
dc.date.accessioned2016-01-20T16:42:06Z
dc.date.issued2015-04-13en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://qmro.qmul.ac.uk/xmlui/handle/123456789/10836
dc.description.abstractOften we make snap moral judgments based on limited information. For instance upon reading a newspaper headline we very quickly decide on whether the implied outcome is good or bad. However, in situations like this we are also likely to revise our judgments when we read the main story and the conclusion of the article. One question yet to be answered is whether we adjust our moral judgments in a systematic way as we gain more details about a moral scenario. Two experiments (lab-based, online) addressed this question along with the influence of other factors on moral judgments (the origin of the moral scenario, the severity of the consequence of the scenario). Across both experiments, moral judgments were: 1) generally adjusted downwards as more information was presented; 2) more severe for headlines than the main story or the conclusion; 3) more severe for scenarios that were fabricated than real life stories; 4) more severe when the conclusion involved a severe consequence than a non-severe consequence.en_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherScientific research publishingen_US
dc.rightsCC-BY.
dc.titleMoral Judgment: Truth, Order and Consequenceen_US
dc.typeArticle
dc.rights.holder© 2015 by authors and Scientific Research Publishing Inc.
pubs.notesNot knownen_US
pubs.publisher-urlhttp://www.scirp.org/journal/psychen_US


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record