Harmful transgressions qua moral transgressions: A deflationary view

Sousa, Paulo; Piazza, Jared

doi:10.1080/13546783.2013.834845

Cited by 34 publications

(48 citation statements)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Historically, societies have not always agreed on which actions constitute cruelty or which individuals and entities are deserving of protection from such abuses (Haslam & Loughnan, 2014;Piazza et al, 2014;Singer, 2011). Yet this fact does not negate the core intuition that individuals who cause unjustified harm have violated an implicit social contract to respect the basic interests of others (Baumard, Andre, & Sperber, 2013;Sousa & Piazza, 2014), or the retributive logic that harmful agents are deserving of punishment (Ashworth, 2010;Baumard, 2011;Carlsmith, Darley, & Robinson, 2002;Darley & Pittman, 2003).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…There is probably no moral intuition more fundamental and ubiquitous than the rejection of cruelty or the infliction of harm for purely selfish reasons (Gert, 2004;Graham, Haidt, & Nosek, 2009;Greene, 2012;Henrich et al, 2006;Piazza, Landy, & Goodwin, 2014;Pinker, 2012;Sinnott-Armstrong, 2009;Sousa, Holbrook, & Piazza, 2009;Sousa & Piazza, 2014;Turiel, 1983). Historically, societies have not always agreed on which actions constitute cruelty or which individuals and entities are deserving of protection from such abuses (Haslam & Loughnan, 2014;Piazza et al, 2014;Singer, 2011).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Perceiving the agency of harmful agents: A test of dehumanization versus moral typecasting accounts

2016

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

It is clear that harmful agents are targets of severe condemnation, but it is much less clear how perceivers conceptualize the agency of harmful agents. The current studies tested two competing predictions made by moral typecasting theory and the dehumanization literature. Across six studies, harmful agents were perceived to possess less agency than neutral (non-offending) and benevolent agents, consistent with a dehumanization perspective but inconsistent with the assumptions of moral typecasting theory. This was observed for human targets (Studies 1-2b, and 4-5) and corporations (Study 3), and across various gradations of harmfulness (Studies 3-4).Importantly, denial of agency to harmful agents occurred even when controlling for perceptions of the agent's likeability (Studies 2a and 2b) and while using two different operationalizations of agency (Study 2a). Study 5 showed that harmful agents are denied agency primarily through an inferential process, and less through motivations to see the agent punished. Across all six studies, harmful agents were deemed less worthy of moral standing as a consequence of their harmful conduct and this reduction in moral standing was mediated through reductions in agency. Our findings clarify a current tension in the moral cognition literature, which have direct implications for the moral typecasting framework.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Perceiving the agency of harmful agents: A test of dehumanization versus moral typecasting accounts

2016

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Kiek supaprastinant, moralės normos apibūdinamos specifikuojant arba normos turinį, arba normą vertinančio subjekto metakognityvinę laikyseną normos atžvilgiu (Sousa and Piazza 2014;Berniūnas 2014;Berniūnas, Dranseika and Sousa 2016;landy 2016). kaip sukeliantys žalą, o Kinijoje -tie, kurie suvokiami kaip nekultūringi ar necivilizuoti.…”

unclassified

„bu Daode“ Elgesys Kinijoje Ir Vakaruose. Kaip Išvengti Asimetriškumo Tarpkultūrinėje Normų Psichologijoje

Silius¹,

Berniūnas²,

Dranseika³

2017

PRB

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…We are sceptical about modelling normative judgements simply on a graded continuum (in terms of psychological validity) [6]. We would argue that it is plausible to suppose that participants parse the 5-point badness/goodness scale categorically in terms of the act being wrong or not-wrong.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…We [3,4] entered the aforementioned debate by offering an empirically guided methodological critique of the research of Kelly et al We also proposed a deflationary reformulation of Turiel's original hypothesis in which harmful transgressions are understood as authority independent and universally wrong when they are perceived to involve injustice and basic-rights violations [5,6]. One major criticism we had of Kelly et al's study is that it presented participants cases of harmful actions, such harm as military training or as punishment, that many participants viewed as justifiable [3,4].…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%