Emotional and behavioural reactions to moral transgressions: Cross-cultural and individual variations in India and Britain

International Journal of Psychology

Volumn 45, Issue 1, 2010, Pages 64-71

  Laham, Simon M ^a   Chopra, Sonavi ^b   Lalljee, Mansur ^b   Parkinson, Brian ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MELBOURNE   (Australia)

^b UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Action tendencies; Anger; Contempt; Respect

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ANGER; ARTICLE; COMPARATIVE STUDY; CULTURAL FACTOR; DEMOGRAPHY; EMOTION; FEMALE; HUMAN; INDIA; INDIVIDUALITY; MALE; MORALITY; PERSONAL AUTONOMY; PSYCHOLOGICAL ASPECT; SOCIAL BEHAVIOR; SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY; STUDENT; UNITED KINGDOM;

ANGER; CROSS-CULTURAL COMPARISON; EMOTIONS; FEMALE; GREAT BRITAIN; HUMANS; INDIA; INDIVIDUALITY; MALE; MORALS; PERSONAL AUTONOMY; RESIDENCE CHARACTERISTICS; SOCIAL BEHAVIOR; SOCIAL IDENTIFICATION; SOCIAL VALUES; STUDENTS; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 77649124235     PISSN: 00207594     EISSN: 1464066X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/00207590902913434     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. Baron, J., & Miller, J. G. (2000). Limiting the scope of moral obligations to help. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 31, 703-725.
2. Dumont, L. (1970). Homo hierarchicus. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
3. Haidt, J. (2007). The new synthesis in moral psychology. Science, 316, 998-1002.
4. Haidt, J., Koller, S. H., & Dias, M. G. (1993). Affect, culture and morality or is it wrong to eat your dog? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65, 613-628.
5. Hofstede, G. (1980). Culture's consequences. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
6. Kakar, S. (1978). The inner world: A psychological study of childhood and society in India. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
7. Kant, I. (1797/1996). Metaphysik der Sitten, translated as Metaphysics of morals, by Mary Gregor. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
8. Kohlberg, L. (1969). Stage and sequence: The cognitive-developmental approach to socialization. In D. A. Goslin (Ed.), Handbook of socialization theory and research (pp. 347-480). Chicago: Rand McNally.
9. Lalljee, M., Laham, S. M., & Tam, T. (2007). Unconditional respect for persons: A social psychological analysis. Gruppendynamik& Organisationsberatung, 38, 451-464.
10. Lalljee, M., Tam, T., Hewstone, M., Laham, S. M., & Lee, J. (in press). Unconditional respect for persons and the prediction of intergroup action tendencies. European Journal of Social Psychology.
11. Miller, D. T. (2001). Disrespect and the experience of injustice. Annual Review of Psychology, 52, 527-553.
12. Miller, J. G. (1984). Culture and the development of everyday social explanation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46, 961-978.
13. Miller, J. G., & Bersoff, D. M. (1998). The role of liking in perceptions of the moral responsibility to help: A cultural perspective. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 34, 443-469.
14. Miller, J. G., Bersoff, D. M., & Harwood, R. L. (1990). Perceptions of social responsibilities in India and in the United States: Moral imperatives or personal decisions? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58, 33-47.
15. Miller, J. G., & Luthar, S. (1989). Issues of interpersonal responsibility and accountability: A comparison of Indians' and Americans' judgments. Social Cognition, 7, 237-261.
16. Monin, B., Pizarro, D. A., & Beer, J. (2007). Deciding vs. reacting: Conceptions of moral judgment and the reason-affect debate. Review of General Psychology, 11, 99-111.
17. Morris, M. W., & Peng, K. (1994). Culture and cause: American and Chinese attributions for social and physical events. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 949-971.
18. O'Flaherty, W. D., & Derrett, J. D. (1978). Introduction. In W. D. O'Flaherty& J. D. Derrett (Eds.), The concept of duty in South Asia (pp. xiii-xix). Delhi, India: Vikas.
19. Oyserman, D., Coon, H. M., & Kemmelmeier, M. (2002). Rethinking individualism and collectivism: Evaluation of theoretical assumptions and metaanalyses. Psychological Bulletin, 128, 3-72.
20. Rozin, P., Lowery, L., Imada, S., & Haidt, J. (1999). The CAD triad hypothesis: A mapping between three moral emotions (contempt, anger, disgust) and three moral codes (community, autonomy, divinity). Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76, 574-586.
21. Schwarz, S. H. (1990). Individualism-collectivism: Critique and proposed refinements. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 21, 139-157.
22. Shweder, R. A., Much, N. C., Mahapatra, M., & Park, L. (1997). The "Big Three" of morality (autonomy, community, divinity) and the "Big Three" explanations of suffering. In A. Brandt& P. Rozin (Eds.), Morality and health (pp. 119-169). New York: Routledge.
23. Tetlock, P. E. (1999). Coping with trade-offs: Psychological constraints and political implications. In S. Lupia, M. McCubbins, & S. Popkin (Eds.), Political reasoning and choice (pp. 239-263). Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
24. Tetlock, P. E., Kristel, O. V., Elson, S. B., Green, M. C., & Lerner, J. S. (2000). The psychology of the unthinkable: Taboo trade-offs, forbidden base rates, and heretical counterfactuals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 853-870.
25. Triandis, H. C. (1990). Cross-cultural studies of individualism and collectivism. In R. A. Dienstbier& J. Berman (Eds.), Nebraska Symposium on Motivation: Vol. 37. Cultural perspectives (pp. 41-134). New York: Plenum.