Home > Research > Publications & Outputs > Which appraisals are foundational to moral judg...

Electronic data

  • Authors Final SPPS Aug 24

    Rights statement: The final, definitive version of this article has been published in the Journal, Social Psychological and Personality Science, 10 (7), 2019, © SAGE Publications Ltd, 2019 by SAGE Publications Ltd at the Feminist Theory page: http://fty.sagepub.com/ on SAGE Journals Online: http://online.sagepub.com/

    Accepted author manuscript, 1.82 MB, PDF document

Links

Text available via DOI:

View graph of relations

Which appraisals are foundational to moral judgment?: Harm, injustice, and beyond

Research output: Contribution to Journal/MagazineJournal articlepeer-review

Published

Standard

Which appraisals are foundational to moral judgment? Harm, injustice, and beyond. / Piazza, Jared Raymond; Sousa, Paulo; Rottman, Joshua; Syropoulos, Stylianos.

In: Social Psychological and Personality Science, Vol. 10, No. 7, 01.09.2019, p. 903-913.

Research output: Contribution to Journal/MagazineJournal articlepeer-review

Harvard

Piazza, JR, Sousa, P, Rottman, J & Syropoulos, S 2019, 'Which appraisals are foundational to moral judgment? Harm, injustice, and beyond', Social Psychological and Personality Science, vol. 10, no. 7, pp. 903-913. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550618801326

APA

Piazza, J. R., Sousa, P., Rottman, J., & Syropoulos, S. (2019). Which appraisals are foundational to moral judgment? Harm, injustice, and beyond. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 10(7), 903-913. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550618801326

Vancouver

Piazza JR, Sousa P, Rottman J, Syropoulos S. Which appraisals are foundational to moral judgment? Harm, injustice, and beyond. Social Psychological and Personality Science. 2019 Sep 1;10(7):903-913. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550618801326

Author

Piazza, Jared Raymond ; Sousa, Paulo ; Rottman, Joshua ; Syropoulos, Stylianos. / Which appraisals are foundational to moral judgment? Harm, injustice, and beyond. In: Social Psychological and Personality Science. 2019 ; Vol. 10, No. 7. pp. 903-913.

Bibtex

@article{832fce90d9704cb587a0ca6f762fd6fa,
title = "Which appraisals are foundational to moral judgment?: Harm, injustice, and beyond",
abstract = "Harm-centric accounts of judgments of moral wrongdoing argue that moral judgments are fundamentally based on appraisals of harm. However, past research has failed to operationally discriminate harm appraisals from appraisals related to injustice. Four studies carefully discriminated harm qua pain/suffering from injustice, alongside appraisals related to impurity, authority, and disloyalty. Appraisals of injustice outperformed appraisals of harm as independent predictors of the judged wrongness of recalled offenses (Study 1). Studies 2a, 2b, and 3 extended these findings using a diverse range of wrongful acts and two different cultural samples—the United States and Greece. In addition to the strong relevance of injustice appraisals, these latter studies uncovered substantial contributions of impurity and authority appraisals. The results inform debates on moral pluralism and the foundations of moral cognition.",
keywords = "moral judgment, harm, injustice, moral foundations theory, moral pluralism",
author = "Piazza, {Jared Raymond} and Paulo Sousa and Joshua Rottman and Stylianos Syropoulos",
note = "The final, definitive version of this article has been published in the Journal, Social Psychological and Personality Science, 10 (7), 2019, {\textcopyright} SAGE Publications Ltd, 2019 by SAGE Publications Ltd at the Feminist Theory page: http://fty.sagepub.com/ on SAGE Journals Online: http://online.sagepub.com/",
year = "2019",
month = sep,
day = "1",
doi = "10.1177/1948550618801326",
language = "English",
volume = "10",
pages = "903--913",
journal = "Social Psychological and Personality Science",
issn = "1948-5506",
publisher = "Sage Periodicals Press",
number = "7",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Which appraisals are foundational to moral judgment?

T2 - Harm, injustice, and beyond

AU - Piazza, Jared Raymond

AU - Sousa, Paulo

AU - Rottman, Joshua

AU - Syropoulos, Stylianos

N1 - The final, definitive version of this article has been published in the Journal, Social Psychological and Personality Science, 10 (7), 2019, © SAGE Publications Ltd, 2019 by SAGE Publications Ltd at the Feminist Theory page: http://fty.sagepub.com/ on SAGE Journals Online: http://online.sagepub.com/

PY - 2019/9/1

Y1 - 2019/9/1

N2 - Harm-centric accounts of judgments of moral wrongdoing argue that moral judgments are fundamentally based on appraisals of harm. However, past research has failed to operationally discriminate harm appraisals from appraisals related to injustice. Four studies carefully discriminated harm qua pain/suffering from injustice, alongside appraisals related to impurity, authority, and disloyalty. Appraisals of injustice outperformed appraisals of harm as independent predictors of the judged wrongness of recalled offenses (Study 1). Studies 2a, 2b, and 3 extended these findings using a diverse range of wrongful acts and two different cultural samples—the United States and Greece. In addition to the strong relevance of injustice appraisals, these latter studies uncovered substantial contributions of impurity and authority appraisals. The results inform debates on moral pluralism and the foundations of moral cognition.

AB - Harm-centric accounts of judgments of moral wrongdoing argue that moral judgments are fundamentally based on appraisals of harm. However, past research has failed to operationally discriminate harm appraisals from appraisals related to injustice. Four studies carefully discriminated harm qua pain/suffering from injustice, alongside appraisals related to impurity, authority, and disloyalty. Appraisals of injustice outperformed appraisals of harm as independent predictors of the judged wrongness of recalled offenses (Study 1). Studies 2a, 2b, and 3 extended these findings using a diverse range of wrongful acts and two different cultural samples—the United States and Greece. In addition to the strong relevance of injustice appraisals, these latter studies uncovered substantial contributions of impurity and authority appraisals. The results inform debates on moral pluralism and the foundations of moral cognition.

KW - moral judgment

KW - harm

KW - injustice

KW - moral foundations theory

KW - moral pluralism

U2 - 10.1177/1948550618801326

DO - 10.1177/1948550618801326

M3 - Journal article

VL - 10

SP - 903

EP - 913

JO - Social Psychological and Personality Science

JF - Social Psychological and Personality Science

SN - 1948-5506

IS - 7

ER -