Perspectives on the Ecology of Decision Modes

Bennis, Will M.; Medin, Douglas L.; Bartels, Daniel M.

doi:10.1177/1745691610362363

Cited by 5 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Our results may thus provide some clues for understanding the mechanisms underlying the distinct reaction types as well as changing between these modes, or tendencies, of processing, an issue that has also been recognized as crucial in attempts to overcome psychological and social barriers to conflict resolution, for example, by promoting understanding of other people’s moral interests that may conflict with one’s own SVs (Atran & Axelrod, 2008; Atran et al, 2007). The findings are also consistent with the more general notion that decision behavior depends on internal factors as well as contexts (Bennis, Medin, & Bartels, 2010; Payne, Bettmann, & Johnson, 1993).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 89%

Sacred values: Trade-off type matters.

Duc

Hanselmann

Boesiger

et al. 2013

Journal of Neuroscience, Psychology, and Economics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Previous psychological investigations revealed that sacred values (SVs; the belief that certain values are nonsubstitutable and may not be traded off, in particular, against secular economic values) modulates moral decision making depending on the type of SV infringement involved. Extending this research, we compared neurofunctional correlates determined from fMRI measurements during decision making in 3 different trade-off types (taboo, tragic, and routine) with psychological measures obtained from the same 2 participant groups characterized by either high SV (SVH) or low (SVL) scoring values. Congruent with previous studies showing that outright SV violation tends to provoke profound moral indignation, in accordance with the surmise that SVs serve as a heuristic under these (taboo trade-off) conditions, and in conformity with previous reports on neurofunctional changes observed in volunteers confronted with moral norm transgressions, we found increased blood oxygenation level-dependent (BOLD) signals in the left anterior temporal lobe and bilateral amygdalae, as well as significant correlation between right amygdala BOLD signals and moral disgust ratings, in the taboo trade-off condition for the SVH (compared with the SVL) group. The results are discussed in relation to previous research suggesting a close association of SVs with a deontological focus of moral universalism, as well as regarding mechanisms supposed to play a key role in overcoming barriers to the resolution of deep-seated conflicts.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 89%

Sacred values: Trade-off type matters.

Duc

Hanselmann

Boesiger

et al. 2013

Journal of Neuroscience, Psychology, and Economics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For example, they may want to know whether they know anyone on the footbridge or on the tracks (Bloom, ), whether anyone from the railroad is aware of the situation or in a position to help, why no other safety mechanisms are in place, and whether they can ignore the legal ramifications of their actions. Thus, trolley problems may lack mundane realism because people often reject the worlds that trolley problems and other sacrificial dilemmas depict, even if they can get past the humorous elements (for more on this issue of “closed‐world assumptions”, see Bazerman & Greene, ; Bennis et al, ; Bennis, Medin, & Bartels, ; Schwartz, , and Tetlock & Mitchell, ).…”

Section: Threats To External Validitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Revisiting External Validity: Concerns about Trolley Problems and Other Sacrificial Dilemmas in Moral Psychology

Bauman

McGraw

Bartels

et al. 2014

Social & Personality Psych

Self Cite

263

204

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Sacrificial dilemmas, especially trolley problems, have rapidly become the most recognizable scientific exemplars of moral situations; they are now a familiar part of the psychological literature and are featured prominently in textbooks and the popular press. We are concerned that studies of sacrificial dilemmas may lack experimental, mundane, and psychological realism and therefore suffer from low external validity. Our apprehensions stem from three observations about trolley problems and other similar sacrificial dilemmas: (i) they are amusing rather than sobering, (ii) they are unrealistic and unrepresentative of the moral situations people encounter in the real world, and (iii) they do not elicit the same psychological processes as other moral situations. We believe it would be prudent to use more externally valid stimuli when testing descriptive theories that aim to provide comprehensive accounts of moral judgment and behavior.Research on morality has experienced a major resurgence over the past decade. A shift away from rationalist theories that dominated the literature for many years created new theoretical space, prompted new questions, and called for new empirical methods. New stimuli created for laboratory studies have spurred research activity and led to many contributions to our understanding of morality. However, we believe it is now important to revisit the methodological principle of external validity. We question whether behavioral scientists who study morality should be concerned that they have become desensitized to potential limitations of stimuli that have risen in prominence over the past several years. To the extent that researchers seek to develop general theories of morality, their study stimuli must engage the same psychological processes that operate in everyday situations (Aronson, Wilson, & Brewer, 1998;Mook, 1983).The scholarly literature on moral judgment increasingly features studies that examine people's reactions to "sacrificial dilemmas" (Bartels & Pizarro, 2011), or brief scenarios where the only way to prevent a calamity from affecting a group of people would be to harm someone else or some smaller group. The trade-off in sacrificial dilemmas is not problematic in and of itself. Researchers can learn a great deal from the way people approach tough choices that put different moral considerations in conflict. Our concern, however, is that many sacrificial dilemmas are set in fanciful, sometimes absurd, contexts, and these artificial settings may affect the way people approach the situation and decide what to do. Moral psychology has developed a sophisticated understanding of how people respond to sacrificial dilemmas (Bartels, Bauman, Cushman, Pizarro, & McGraw, in press;Waldmann, Nagel, & Wiegmann, 2012), but we worry that the judgment and decision-making processes people use in these unusual situations may not External Validity in Moral Psychology 537 accurately reflect moral functioning in a broader set of situations. To be clear, our focus in the current paper is on...

show abstract

“…Performance goals are often derived from rational cost–benefit analysis (CBA). This effort is often unclear in the ESDM context (Bazerman and Greene, ; Bennis et al ., , ). The term rational suggests a decision is made systematically, consistent with organizational goals (Pham, ).…”

Section: Ethical Decision‐makingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Environmental sustainability decision‐making: clearing a path to change

Sekerka

Stimel

2012

Journal of Public Affairs

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

If people expect organizations to care for the natural environment, leaders in public affairs need to better understand how and why firms move to engage in sustainable enterprise. We broach this issue as an ethical challenge and present a theoretical framework to explain the path to environmental sustainability decision-making (ESDM). Standard ethics and economic decision-making models inform our work, yet we also incorporate a non-rational element, allowing us to draw insight from psychology and organizational behavior. This view reflects the holistic nature of ESDM, an effort driven by both conscious and non-conscious elements. Our work edifies sustainable development theory by presenting ESDM in the context of collective moral emotions, which serve as underlying motivators of ideas and feelings. We add granularity to prior models, describing how this affective force can influence an organization's progression along the ESDM path. In moving to achieve sustainability goals that affect stakeholders, we explain how negative sentiments may impose drag and how positive sentiments may compel lift toward environmental sustainability action. These paths can contribute to worthwhile, yet different, forms of change. Awareness of the ESDM framework will help public affairs establish more congruent communication, processes, and policies, working to reduce uncertainty and encouraging the need for more explicit internal self-regulation. By synthesizing concepts, we create a coherent and useful picture, one that can give public affairs access to these ideas and help them find useful ways to apply them. Implications suggest leveraging strengths from affective forces may be a useful means to encourage actions that protect the natural environment.

show abstract

Perspectives on the Ecology of Decision Modes

Cited by 5 publications

References 4 publications

Sacred values: Trade-off type matters.

Sacred values: Trade-off type matters.

Revisiting External Validity: Concerns about Trolley Problems and Other Sacrificial Dilemmas in Moral Psychology

Environmental sustainability decision‐making: clearing a path to change

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About