The Role of Conscious Reasoning and Intuition in Moral Judgment

By Fiery Cushman, Liane L. Young, Marc D. Hauser. Psychology Science, 2006

1,039 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Cognitive Neuroscience, Information Systems and Management, Social Psychology

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/a30e3a3c5d6e6891188748c0e1cbaf73300be803

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Cognitive Neuroscience

In Information Systems and Management

In Social Psychology

Citations in the corpus

Intermediation Reduces Punishment (and Reward) (2011, neutral): “…1996 on anger in the ultimatum game, Valdesolo & DeSteno 2006 for exogenous variation in emotion and moral judgments, and Wheatley & Haidt 2005 on hypnotic disgust and moral judgment); in fact, subjects often are unable to explain why they made the moral judgment that they did (Cushman et al 2006).”
Innocent intentions: a correlation between forgiveness for accidental harm and neural activity. (2009, background): “Observers are even sensitive to more subtle mental state distinctions, judging harms intended as necessary means to an end to be worse than harms that are merely foreseen as side-effects of one’s action (Borg, Hynes, Van Horn, Grafton, & Sinnott-Armstrong, 2006; Cushman et al., 2006; Hauser, Cushm”
A Model for Ethical Decision Making in Business: Reasoning, Intuition, and Rational Moral Principles (2011, background): “Some conclude that one or the other system dominates, depending on the situation ( Cushman et al. 2006; Sonenshein 2007).”
The psychology of moral reasoning (2008, methodology): “We chose three dilemmas (1–3) from Cushman et al. (2006), and devised three new dilemmas based in part on those in the literature.”
Dirty Work, Clean Hands: The Moral Psychology of Indirect Agency (2009, background): “Recent work in moral psychology examines the roles played by various forms of physical indirectness in the evaluation of harmful actions ( Cushman, Young, & Hauser, 2006; Greene et al., in press; Greene, Sommerville, Nystrom, Darley, & Cohen, 2001; Royzman & Baron, 2002; Waldmann & Dieterich, 2007)”
A reanalysis of the personal/impersonal distinction in moral psychology research (2009, background): “For example, the footbridge and trolley cases, which are the most similar between conditions, differ on whether the action involves physical contact and harm as a means to an end, both of which have been indicated as factors in moral judgement (Cushman et al., 2006).”
Pushing moral buttons: the interaction between personal force and intention in moral judgment. (2009, methodology): “Subjects responded to one of three versions of the speedboat dilemma (Cushman et al., 2006), in which saving the lives of five drowning swimmers requires lightening the load of a speedboat.”
Cultural differences in responses to real-life and hypothetical trolley problems (2014, neutral): “Experimenters have found that the average participant’s responses agree with philosophers’ intuitions in this case (e.g., Cushman, Young, & Hauser, 2006; Greene, Som-merville, Nystrom, Darley, & Cohen, 2001).”
A New Set of Moral Dilemmas: Norms for Moral Acceptability, Decision Times, and Emotional Salience (2014, methodology): “The effect of intention in determining people’s moral judgments has been explored by a number of studies (Borg, Hynes, Van Horn, Grafton, & Sinnott-Armstrong, 2006; Cushman et al. 2006; Hauser, Cushman, Young, Jin, & Mikhail, 2007; Mikhail, 2002) calling into question the DDE (Aquinas, 1952/1274).”
Trait psychopathy and utilitarian moral judgement: The mediating role of action aversion (2015, background): “Indeed, most people agree that the best course of action in such impersonal moral dilemmas is sacrificing one to save many (Cushman et al., 2006; Gleichgerrcht & Young, 2013; Greene et al., 2001, 2004, 2008, 2009; Hauser et al., 2007; Mikhail, 2007).”