Explaining Away Differences in Moral Judgment: Comment on Gray and Keeney (2015)

Social Psychological and Personality Science

Volumn 6, Issue 8, 2015, Pages 869-873

  Graham, Jesse ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

evidence; monism; moral judgment; morality; pluralism

Indexed keywords

EID: 84943154409     PISSN: 19485506     EISSN: 19485514     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/1948550615592242     Document Type: Article

References (19)

1. C.D.CameronK.A.LindquistK.Gray (2015). A constructionist review of morality and emotions: No evidence for specific links between moral content and discrete emotions. Personality and Social Psychology Review. Advanced online publication. doi:10.1177/1088868314566683
2. A.ChakroffL.Young (2015). Harmful situations, impure people: An attribution asymmetry across moral domains. Cognition, 136, 30–37.
3. S.CliffordV.IyengarR.CabezaW.Sinnott-Armstrong (2015). Moral Foundations Vignettes: A standardized stimulus database of scenarios based on moral foundations theory. Behavior Research Methods, 1–21.
4. J.F.CornwellE.T.Higgins (2013). Morality and its relation to political ideology: The role of promotion and prevention concerns. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 39, 1164–1172.
5. F.Cushman (2013). Action, outcome, and value: A dual-system framework for morality. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 17, 273–292.
6. M.V.DayS.T.FiskeE.L.DowningT.E.Trail (2014). Shifting liberal and conservative attitudes using moral foundations theory. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 40, 1559–1573.
7. M.DehghaniK.M.JohnsonE.SagiJ.GartenN.J.ParmarS.VaiseyR.IlievJ.Graham (2015). Purity homophily in social networks. Manuscript submitted for publication.
8. P.DeScioliK.AsaoR.Kurzban (2012). Omissions and byproducts across moral domains. PLoS ONE, 7, e46963.
9. M.FeinbergR.Willer (2013). The moral roots of environmental attitudes. Psychological Science, 24, 56–62.
10. J.GrahamJ.Haidt (2012). Sacred values and evil adversaries: A moral foundations approach. In P.ShaverM.Mikulincer (Eds.), The social psychology of morality: Exploring the causes of good and evil (pp. 11–31). New York, NY: American Psychological Association Books.
11. J.GrahamJ.HaidtB.A.Nosek (2009). Liberals and conservatives rely on different sets of moral foundations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96, 1029–1046.
12. J.GrahamJ.HaidtS.KolevaM.MotylR.IyerS.WojcikP.H.Ditto (2013). Moral foundations theory: The pragmatic validity of moral pluralism. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 47, 55–130.
13. J.GrahamB.A.NosekJ.HaidtR.IyerS.KolevaP.H.Ditto (2011). Mapping the moral domain. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 101, 366–385.
14. K.GrayJ.Keeney (2015). Impure, or just weird? Scenario sampling bias raises questions about the foundations of morality. Social Psychology and Personality Science, 6, 859–868.
15. K.GrayC.Schein (2012). Two minds vs. two philosophies: Mind perception defines morality and dissolves the debate between deontology and utilitarianism. Review of Philosophy and Psychology, 3, 1–19.
16. R.Janoff-BulmanN.C.Carnes (2013). Surveying the moral landscape: Moral motives and group-based moralities. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 17, 219–236.
17. J.L.NapierJ.B.Luguri (2013). Moral mind-sets: Abstract thinking increases a preference for “individualizing” over “binding” moral foundations. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 4, 754–759.
18. T.S.RaiA.P.Fiske (2011). Moral psychology is relationship regulation: Moral motives for unity, hierarchy, equality, and proportionality. Psychological Review, 118, 57–75.
19. E.L.UhlmannL.Zhu (2013). Acts, persons, and intuitions: Person-centered cues and gut reactions to harmless transgressions. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 5, 279–285.