바로가기메뉴

본문 바로가기 주메뉴 바로가기

Korean Journal of Social and Personality Psychology

ISSN : 1229-0653

Article Contents

Prev Next
e-Submission

Vol.25 No.4
Citation Share

Can Probability Shape Moral Decisions? Probability as Psychological Distance

Korean Journal of Social and Personality Psychology / Korean Journal of Social and Personality Psychology, (P)1229-0653;
2011, v.25 no.4, pp.27-40
https://doi.org/10.21193/kjspp.2011.25.4.002



& (2011). Can Probability Shape Moral Decisions? Probability as Psychological Distance. Korean Journal of Social and Personality Psychology, 25(4), 27-40, https://doi.org/10.21193/kjspp.2011.25.4.002
  • Downloaded
  • Viewed
PDF Download

Abstract

The present study proposes that probability (How likely is an event X to happen) would influence how people make moral decisions. When an event is unlikely, due to their uncertain and abstract nature, psychological distance is augmented and people construe these events in terms of general moral principles rather than attenuating situation-specific considerations. On the other hand, when an event is highly likely, psychological distance decreases, leading people to consider specific situational costs and benefits. 3 studies test these assumptions. Study 1 confirms probability as one dimension of psychological distance. Building on study 1, study 2 and 3 test the effect of probability in willingness to conduct positive and negative moral behavior. As predicted, when probability is low, people are more willing to act according to moral principles, exhibiting higher willingness for positive moral behavior and less willingness in being involved with negative moral behavior.

keywords
Psychological distance, Moral judgment, Probability, Construal level theory, 확률, 이해수준이론, 심리적 거리감, 도덕적 의사결정

Reference

1.

Bartels, D. M. (2008). Principled moral sentiment andthe flexibility of moral judgment and decisionmaking. Cognition, 108, 381-417.

2.

Eyal, T., Liberman, N., & Trope, Y. (2008). Judgingnear and distant virtue and vice. Journal ofExperimental Social Psychology, 44, 1204-1209.

3.

Forster, J., Friedman, R. S., & Liberman, N. (2004).Temporal construal effects on abstract andconcrete thinking: Consequences for insight andcreative cognition. Journal of Personality andSocial Ssychology, 87, 177-189.

4.

Green, J. D., Sommerville, R. B., Nystrom, L. E.,Darley, J. M., & Cohen, J. D. (2001). An fMRIinvestigation of Emotional Engagement in moraljudgment. Science, 293, 2015-2018.

5.

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

6.

Janoff-Bulman, R., Sheikh, S., & Hepp, S. (2009).Proscriptive Versus Prescriptive Morality: Twofaces of moral regulation, Journal of Personalityand Social Psychology, 96, 521-537.

7.

Jones, T. M. (1991). Ethical decision making byindividuals in organizations: An issue-contingentmodel. Academy of Management Review, 16,366-395.

8.

Liberman, N., & Trope, Y. (1998). The role offeasibility and desirability considerations in nearand distant future decisions: A test of temporalconstrual theory. Journal of Personality andSocial Psychology, 75, 5-18.

9.

Liberman, N., Sagristano, M., & Trope, Y. (2002).The effect of temporal distance on level ofmental construal. Journal of Experimental SocialPsychology, 38, 523-534.

10.

Liberman, N., Trope, Y., & Stephan, E. (2007).Psychological distance. In A. W. Kruglanski &E.T. Higgins (Eds.), Social psychology:Handbook of basic principles (2nd ed.). NewYork: Guilford Press.

11.

Sheikh, S. (2007). Moral Motivations: Therelationship between self-regulation and morality.Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University ofMassachusetts Amherst.

12.

Smith, P. K. & Trope, Y. (2006). You focus on theforest when you’re in charge of the trees: powerpriming and abstract information processing.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,90, 578-596.

13.

Todorov, A., Goren, A., & Trope, Y. (2007).Probability as a psychological distance: Construaland preferences. Journal of Experimental SocialPsychology, 43, 473-482.

14.

Trope, Y., Liberman, N., & Wakslak, C. (2007).Construal levels and psychological distance.Effects on representation, prediction, evaluation,and behavior. Journal of consumer psychology,17, 83-95.

15.

Turiel, E. (2008). Thought about actions in socialdomains: Morality, social conventions, and socialinteractions. Cognitive development, 23, 136-154.

16.

Wakslak, C. J., Trope, Y., Liberman, N., & Alony, R.(2006). Seeing the forest when entry is unlikely:Probability and the mental representation ofevents. Journal of Experimental Psychology:General, 135, 641–653.

17.

Wakslak, C. J., & Trope, Y. (2008). The who, where,and when of low and high probability events:Probability as distance and everyday decisionmaking. Unpublished manuscript, New YorkUniversity.

18.

Wakslak, C. & Trope, Y. (2008). The Effect ofConstrual level on Subjective probabilityestimates. Psychological Science, 20, 52-58.

Korean Journal of Social and Personality Psychology

e-Submission OA Policy