바로가기메뉴

본문 바로가기 주메뉴 바로가기

logo

ISSN : 1226-9654

Article Contents

Prev Next
e-Submission

Vol.26 No.4
Citation Share

Outcome Determines Intention: Korean's intention and intentionality judgment

The Korean Journal of Cognitive and Biological Psychology / The Korean Journal of Cognitive and Biological Psychology, (P)1226-9654; (E)2733-466X
2014, v.26 no.4, pp.317-341
https://doi.org/10.22172/cogbio.2014.26.4.006


& (2014). Outcome Determines Intention: Korean's intention and intentionality judgment. The Korean Journal of Cognitive and Biological Psychology, 26(4), 317-341, https://doi.org/10.22172/cogbio.2014.26.4.006
  • Downloaded
  • Viewed
PDF Download

Abstract

The side-effect effect (2003a, 2003b, 2004) states that the moral consequence of one’s action influences the inference of intentionality of the action but does not influence the judgments of actor’s intention. The goal of this research was to validate Knobe and Burra (2006)’s argument that the side-effect effect is culture-universal by investigating whether Korean revealed the effect. In this research, we performed three experiments. In Experiments 1 and 2, we looked at the impact of moral consequences of an action on judgments of the actor’s intention (Experiment 1) and on those of intentionality of the action (Experiment 2). The results indicated that the moral consequences of an action mediate both the intention judgments and intentionality judgments. For a morally wrong consequence, Koreans believed that an actor performed an action intentionally but that an actor did not perform an action intentionally for a morally good consequence. Contrary to prediction of the side-effect effect, the same patterns were observed in intention judgments. Experiment 3 tested two alternative hypotheses about Koreans’ moral judgments reported in Experiments 1 and 2, ‘the modified mind-behavior consistency’ hypothesis and ‘the stronger side-effect effect’ hypothesis, The results suggested that ‘the stronger side-effect effect’ hypothesis explain Koreans’ intention and intentionality judgments better than ‘the modified mind-behavior consistency’ hypothesis. Possible implications and limitations were discussed.

keywords
The Knobe effect, moral reasoning, intention, intentional action, cultural difference, 부수적-결과 효과, 의도, 의도성, 문화차, 도덕 판단

Reference

1.

김경호 (2007) 진정성 회복을 위한 수양론의 두 유형. 유교사상문화연구, 28, 101-124.

2.

김도희 (2011). 도덕 판단에서의 이중과정: 인과 판단과 비난 판단, 행위 판단과 행위자 판단의 차이. 성균관대학교 석사학위 논문.

3.

박성규 (2005). 공자, <論語>. 서울대학교 철학사상연구소.

4.

이현진 (2009) 마음 이론과 도덕 판단에서 나타난 부작용 효과. 한국 심리학회지: 발달, 22, 69-83.

5.

Adams, F. (1997). Cognitive trying. In Contemporary Action Theory, vol. 1, eds. G. Holmstron- Hintikka and R. Tuomela, 287-314. Dordrecht: Kluwer.

6.

Adams, F. and A. Steadman (2004). Intentional action in ordinary language: core concept or pragmatic understanding? Analysis 64(2), 173-181.

7.

Alicke, M. D. (2000). Culpable control and the psychology of blame. Psychological Bulletin. 126(4), 556-574.

8.

Astington, J. W. (1999). The language of intention: Three ways of doing it. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.

9.

Astington, J. W. (2001). The paradox of intention: Assessing children’s metarepresentational understanding. Intentions and intentionality: Foundations of social cognition, 85-103.

10.

Chiu Loke, I., Heyman, G. D., Itakura, S., Toriyama, R., & Lee, K. (2014). Japanese and American children’s moral evaluations of reporting on transgressions. Developmental psychology, 50(5), 1520-1531.

11.

Gold, N., Colman, A. M., & Pulford, B. D. (2014). Cultural differences in responses to real-life and hypothetical trolley problems. Judgmment and Decision Making, 9, 65-76.

12.

Gopnik, A., & Wellman, H. M. (1992). Why the child's theory of mind really is a theory. Mind & Language, 7, 145-171.

13.

Greene, J. & J. Haidt (2002). How(and where) does moral judgment work? Trends in Cognitive Sciences 6(12), 517-523.

14.

Greene, J. D., Sommerville, R. B., Nystrom, L. E., Darley, J. M., &Cohen, J. D. (2001). An fMRI investigation of emotional engagement in moral judgment, Science, 293(5537), 2105- 2108.

15.

Haidt, J. (2001). The emotional dog and its rational tail: A social intuitionist approach to moral judgment. Psychological Review, 108, 814-834.

16.

Han, H., Glover, G. H., & Jeong, C. (2014). Cultural influences on the neural correlate of moral decision making processes. Behavioural brain research, 259, 215-228.

17.

Hume, D. (1978). A treatise of human nature L. A. Selby-Bigge & P. H. Nidditch,(Eds.). New York: Oxford Univ. Press.(Originally published in 1740.)

18.

Knobe, J. (2003a). Intentional action in folk psychology: an experimental investigation. Philosophical Psychology, 16(2). 309-324.

19.

Knobe, J. M. (2003b). Intentional Action and Side Effects in Ordinary Language. Analysis 63, 190-194.

20.

Knobe, J. (2004). Intention, intentional action and moral considerations. Analysis, 64(2),181-187.

21.

Knobe, J. M. and A. Burra (2006). The Folk Concepts of Intention and Intentional Action: A Cross-Cultural Study. Journal of Cognition and Culture, 6, 113-132.

22.

Leslie, A. M., Knobe, J., & Cohen. A. (2006). Acting Intentionally and the Side-Effect Effect. Psychological Science, 17, 421-427.

23.

Knobe, J. (2010). Person as scientist, person as moralist. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 33, 315-365.

24.

Lagnado, D. A., & Channon, S. (2008). Judgments of cause and blame: The effects of intentionality and foreseeability. Cognition, 108(3), 754-770.

25.

Malle, B. F. (2006) Intentionality, Morality, and Their Relationship in Human judgment. Journal of Cognition and Culture, 6, 87-112.

26.

Malle, B. F., & Knobe, J. (1997). The folk concept of intentionality. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 33(2), 101-121.

27.

McCann, H. (1986). Rationality and the range of intention. Midwest Studies in Philosophy, 10, 191-211

28.

McCann, H. J. (2005). Intentional action and intending: Recent empirical studies. Philosophical Psychology, 18(6), 737-748.

29.

Sloman, S. A., Fernbach, P. M., & Ewing, S. (2012). A Causal Model of Intentionality Judgment. Mind & Language, 27(2), 154-180.

30.

Waldmann, M. R., & Dieterich, J. H. (2007). Throwing a bomb on a person versus throwing a person on a bomb intervention myopia in moral intuitions. Psychological science, 18(3), 247-253.

31.

Wellman, H. M. (1990). The child’s theory of mind. Cambridge, MA: Bradford Books.

The Korean Journal of Cognitive and Biological Psychology

e-Submission OA Policy