The browser you are using is not supported by this website. All versions of Internet Explorer are no longer supported, either by us or Microsoft (read more here: https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoft-365/windows/end-of-ie-support).

Please use a modern browser to fully experience our website, such as the newest versions of Edge, Chrome, Firefox or Safari etc.

Patterns of judgments and self-estimated behavior when faced against moral dilemmas of the consequentialistic vs. deontological kind: A pilot study analysis

På svenska

Author

  • Arvid Erlandsson

Summary, in English

The reliability of the newly constructed Moral Attitude Questionnaire (MAQ) was tested in this Pilot study. MAQ aims to assess individual and cultural differences in moral attitudes and expected behavior on a broad scale, contrasting typically consequentialistic attitudes with typically non-consequentialistic attitudes congruent with common-sense moral. Five representative categories with five stories in each were tested. Attitudes towards the intentional act/foreseen omission doctrine and attitudes towards family partiality could be measured in a decently reliable way. The stories measuring attitudes towards retributive punishment and attitudes towards rational suicide showed mixed inter-correlations. Attitudes towards the moral weight of number of victims could not be measured in a reliable way. Participants did expect themselves to behave more partial than they believe they should from a moral perspective. Male participants seemed to be more partial than female participants on both attitude and expected behavior-level.

Publishing year

2010

Language

English

Pages

97-110

Publication/Series

Educational Studies/ Kyoiku Kenkyu

Volume

52

Document type

Journal article

Publisher

International Christian University Publications 1-A

Topic

  • Psychology

Keywords

  • Common Sense Moral
  • Consequentialism
  • Expected Behavior
  • Moral Attitudes
  • Non-consequentialism

Status

Published

ISBN/ISSN/Other

  • ISSN: 0452-3318