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.

Differences in the justification of choices in moral dilemmas: Effects of gender, time pressure and dilemma seriousness

På svenska

Author

Summary, in English

The effects on moral reasoning of gender, time pressure and seriousness of the issue at hand were investigated. In Experiment 1, 72 university students were presented with moral dilemmas and asked what actions the actors involved should take and to justify this. Women were found to be more care-oriented in their reasoning than men, supporting Gilligan’s (1982) moral judgment model. Both time pressure and consideration of non-serious as opposed to serious moral dilemmas led to an increase in a justice orientation as compared to a care orientation in moral judgments. In Experiment 2, a similar task was given to 80 persons of mixed age and profession, and the participants’ moral reasoning was coded in terms of its being either duty-orientated (duty, obligations, rights) or consequence-oriented (effects on others). Men were found to be more duty-oriented than women, and time pressure to lead to a greater incidence of duty orientation.

Publishing year

2003

Language

English

Pages

459-466

Publication/Series

Scandinavian Journal of Psychology

Volume

44

Issue

5

Document type

Journal article

Publisher

Wiley-Blackwell

Topic

  • Psychology

Keywords

  • Morality
  • care
  • justice
  • time pressure

Status

Published

ISBN/ISSN/Other

  • ISSN: 1467-9450