“Lean not on your own understanding”: Belief that morality is founded on divine authority and non-utilitarian moral judgments
Journal Title: Judgment and Decision Making - Year 2013, Vol 8, Issue 6
Abstract
Recent research has shown that religious individuals are much more resistant to utilitarian modes of thinking than their less religious counterparts, but the reason for this is not clear. We propose that a meta-ethical belief that morality is rooted in inviolable divine commands (i.e., endorsement of Divine Command Theory) may help explain this finding. We present a novel 20-item scale measuring a belief that morality is founded on divine authority. The scale shows good internal reliability and convergent and discriminant validity. Study 1 found that this scale fully mediated the relationship that various religiosity measures had with a deontological thinking style in our sample of American adults. It also accounted for the link between religiosity and social conservative values. Furthermore, the relationship between the scale and these outcome variables held after statistically controlling for variables related to actively open-minded thinking and the Big Five. Study 2 replicated the results using naturalistic moral dilemmas that placed deontological and utilitarian concerns in conflict, and showed that the results of Study 1 cannot be explained by differences in moral foundations (e.g., concern for authority more generally) or differences in the perceived function of rules. Quite the contrary, endorsement of the divine origins of morality fully mediated the relationship religiosity had with the so-called “binding” foundations (i.e., Loyalty, Authority, and Sanctity). Our findings highlight the importance of meta-ethical beliefs for understanding individual differences in moral judgment.
Authors and Affiliations
Jared Piazza and Justin F. Landy
Keywords
Related Articles
- EP ID EP678099
- DOI -
- Views 139
- Downloads 0
The effects of attractive but unattainable alternatives on the attractiveness of near and distant future menus
We examine how adding an Attractive but Unattainable Alternative (AUA) to a set of available but less attractive alternatives influences evaluations of near vs. distant future sets of alternatives. According to Construal...
How should we think about Americans’ beliefs about economic mobility?
Recent evidence suggests that Americans’ beliefs about upward mobility are overly optimistic. Davidai & Gilovich (2015a), Kraus & Tan (2015), and Kraus (2015) all found that people overestimate the likelihood that a pers...
Ostracism and fines in a public goods game with accidental contributions: The importance of punishment type
Punishment is an important method for discouraging uncooperative behavior. We use a novel design for a public goods game in which players have explicit intended contributions with accidentally changed actual contribution...
Pair-wise comparisons of multiple models
Often research in judgment and decision making requires comparison of multiple competing models. Researchers invoke global measures such as the rate of correct predictions or the sum of squared (or absolute) deviations o...
Self-reported ethical risk taking tendencies predict actual dishonesty
Are people honest about the extent to which they engage in unethical behaviors? We report an experiment examining the relation between self-reported risky unethical tendencies and actual dishonest behavior. Participants’...